R
Robert P. Odenweller
I have developed a database that includes scans of front
and reverse of envelopes mailed in Samoa in the 19th
century, used in research for a book I’m finishing
writing, hoping to be completed by the end of September.
The scan size of each image is usually about 1MB. In an
earlier version I created a bound object frame and
embedded the scans in .bmp format, as suggested. Since
there are about 1,000 items (with potentially 2,000
illustrations), I ran up against a limitation on Access 97
of 1GB size.
In order to finish the project, I purchased a faster
computer (3GHz) with much larger memory (1GB) and storage
(120GB) to try to handle the files, and also purchased
Office XP Professional. The problems persist.
Adding only two scans (1,928KB total) wound up in
increasing the total database size from 629,160KB to
712,400KB, each compacted. The 83MB increase is very
difficult to understand. Linking the two scans was the
only activity I performed after making a copy of the
database. (Actually, I had to break the database into two
parts, and the 629MB size is for the first half only.)
I believe that Access limits embedded (or linked) files
to .bmp format rather than .jpg, which would be far less
space-consuming. Also, I was of the impression that
linking the image rather than embedding it would save
space.
The previous limit of 1GB on an Access 97 database has
apparently been lifted, since I got to over 1.2GB before
all slowed down and asked me to expand the limits
using “regedit” (I can’t remember the terminology used).
It might be that one could go much larger if those were
expanded, but would that quickly be used up at the 40x
rate?
Is there a solution to the problem? I would at least like
to be able to attach the scans to the files with only the
file size rather than the bloated size of over 40 times
actual. My purchases of the new equipment and programs
don’t seem to have helped much.
I hope you can offer a solution,
many thanks,
Robert P. Odenweller
(e-mail address removed)
and reverse of envelopes mailed in Samoa in the 19th
century, used in research for a book I’m finishing
writing, hoping to be completed by the end of September.
The scan size of each image is usually about 1MB. In an
earlier version I created a bound object frame and
embedded the scans in .bmp format, as suggested. Since
there are about 1,000 items (with potentially 2,000
illustrations), I ran up against a limitation on Access 97
of 1GB size.
In order to finish the project, I purchased a faster
computer (3GHz) with much larger memory (1GB) and storage
(120GB) to try to handle the files, and also purchased
Office XP Professional. The problems persist.
Adding only two scans (1,928KB total) wound up in
increasing the total database size from 629,160KB to
712,400KB, each compacted. The 83MB increase is very
difficult to understand. Linking the two scans was the
only activity I performed after making a copy of the
database. (Actually, I had to break the database into two
parts, and the 629MB size is for the first half only.)
I believe that Access limits embedded (or linked) files
to .bmp format rather than .jpg, which would be far less
space-consuming. Also, I was of the impression that
linking the image rather than embedding it would save
space.
The previous limit of 1GB on an Access 97 database has
apparently been lifted, since I got to over 1.2GB before
all slowed down and asked me to expand the limits
using “regedit” (I can’t remember the terminology used).
It might be that one could go much larger if those were
expanded, but would that quickly be used up at the 40x
rate?
Is there a solution to the problem? I would at least like
to be able to attach the scans to the files with only the
file size rather than the bloated size of over 40 times
actual. My purchases of the new equipment and programs
don’t seem to have helped much.
I hope you can offer a solution,
many thanks,
Robert P. Odenweller
(e-mail address removed)