Please Help - Publisher saving 2 copies of each pic

[js]

I'm using Publisher 2003 to design some pages which I then use in Frontpage.

When I convert the document to a web publication in Publisher and then save
as a webpage, Publisher saves 2 copies of each picture in the folder - 1 is
the original jpg and the other is a VERY large png file of the same picture.

When the page is viewed on the web, it loads the large png version and takes
ages to load.

Any ideas please?

John

 

[DavidF]

You can try disabling Ping and VML options, and it might help a little, but
unfortunately this is just the way Publisher 2003 works now. Sorry.

DavidF

 

[DavidF]

Sorry, I forgot about SP1 for Office 2003. If you install it, you can
compress your images, reduce your file size, and perhaps improve the loading
time. Here is the link:

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/assistance/HA011266301033.aspx

DavidF

 

[js]

David,

thank you very much for the information. I'll try the Office 2003 SP1 advice
and see what happens.

cheers,

John

 

[DavidF]

John, You are welcome. After rereading your original post I am curious
though why you don't just use FrontPage? It is obviously a better web
building tool, plus switching between the two usually produces some major
conflicts. According to David Bartosik, the two produce entirely different
code that are not compatible, and he strongly recommends not trying to
import Publisher code into FrontPage.

DavidF

 

[js]

Hi David,

yes, its sounds a bit odd trying to import Publisher pages into Frontpage.
The reason is I designed a Frontpage website for a client and then he
decided he wanted all his product catalogues on the site. He already had the
catalogue pages done in Publisher himself as he made printed copies for his
clients.
I thought it would save time and money by just converting his Publisher
pages and using them in FP.
They are pages with three columns - product picture, product name and
product description.

Can you think of a better way of dealing with this, other than opening the
Publisher file, converting it to a web publication, saving it as a webpage
and then putting the resulting files into Frontpage?

As you know, I have trouble with the file size of the pictures and also I
have trouble with the columns not lining up correctly when made into html
pages.

thanks again,

John

 

[DavidF]

Hi John,

I understand. Part of the reason I still use Publisher to build my website
is because I use Publisher extensively to produce print documents for my
business, and it is relatively easy to convert those into HTML...but I use
Publisher 2000, which doesn't have the issues associated with 2003.

Have you tried just posting the Publisher generated HTML files and linking
them to the FrontPage part of the site? As David Bartosik has repeatedly
said in this forum, I just don't know that you will ever be happy with the
results of importing Publisher generated files into FrontPage. Though the SP
provides you with a way to compress image files, did your client optimize
the images for the web prior to inserting them into Publisher? Couldn't
hurt. Ultimately you may find it more cost and time effective to simple
recreate the pages in FrontPage from scratch. Perhaps someone else will have
a better idea...

DavidF

 

[js]

Hi again David,

thanks for the tip about Office SP1 for 2003. It seems to do a good job at
reducing the file sizes and I think it will fix my problem.
I don't really want to redo all the pages in Frontpage, although know that
would result in a better and more efficient site. There are about 50 pages -
each with about 12 photos and complicated tables!

Another question ... what is the difference in saving a Publisher document
(that has been converted to a web publication) as a "webpage" or as a
"single file webpage" . I can see that one saves the images in a separate
folder and one embeds the images and just saves a single file, but as far as
a customer viewing a website, what is different?
I added up the file sizes to compare (ie. the single file page with embedded
graphics compared to a page with graphics saved separately) and the totals
seem quite close. So what are the advantages/disadvantages?

cheers,
John

 

[DavidF]

John,

Glad to hear that the SP1 helped. Redoing 50 pages does sound like a
daunting task, and it sounds like I might have misunderstood. If you are
posting the Publisher generated HTML files and linking to the rest of the
site that you build with FrontPage, then that does sound like an efficient
solution for you. And if you found a way to import the files into FrontPage,
and make them work, then good for you. If you have any tips for others on
how best to do this, then please share, as this topic seems to come up a lot
as people outgrow the capabilities of Publisher and wish to convert their
sites to FrontPage.

As to your second question, I find I wish I had Pub 2003 so I could answer
your question. Pub 2000 does not have both options. Pub 2000 does not use
subfolders for images. David Bartosik would be the man to answer this, so if
he doesn't jump in here, repost this question under a new thread so he sees
it. Sorry.

DavidF

 

[David Bartosik [MSFT MVP]]

webpage:

generates a "site", i.e. htm files and supporting image files, with or
without organizing folder per option setting. This is the normal procedure
to be used for creating and posting a web site.

single page:

generates a .mht file, also known as a "web archive file". The .mht file
format is exclusive to IE. You can open IE, browse to a page and go to a web
page, go to File, save as, select mht and it'll save that page as a single
entity locally for you. I myself use this to save off order confirmation
pages or documentation pages that I want to save and file, versus printing.
The .mht file contains all the page elements and so can be viewed off line
at any time. If you wanted to share a pub file with some one that did not
have Publisher to view the pub file then saving it as a mht and telling them
to view that in IE would be a good use for it. You should NOTgenerate mht
files and post those for a web site.

David Bartosik - [MSFT MVP]
www.publishermvps.com
www.davidbartosik.com

 

[DavidF]

Thanks David. I was going to guess MHT, but you can't get there directly
from a Publisher 2000 web file. Are you saying that you can save as an MHT
directly from a Publisher 2003 file? Hummm...that could be handy.

DavidF

webpage:

generates a "site", i.e. htm files and supporting image files, with or
without organizing folder per option setting. This is the normal procedure
to be used for creating and posting a web site.

single page:

generates a .mht file, also known as a "web archive file". The .mht file
format is exclusive to IE. You can open IE, browse to a page and go to a web
page, go to File, save as, select mht and it'll save that page as a single
entity locally for you. I myself use this to save off order confirmation
pages or documentation pages that I want to save and file, versus printing.
The .mht file contains all the page elements and so can be viewed off line
at any time. If you wanted to share a pub file with some one that did not
have Publisher to view the pub file then saving it as a mht and telling them
to view that in IE would be a good use for it. You should NOTgenerate mht
files and post those for a web site.

David Bartosik - [MSFT MVP]
www.publishermvps.com
www.davidbartosik.com

Hi again David,

thanks for the tip about Office SP1 for 2003. It seems to do a good job at
reducing the file sizes and I think it will fix my problem.
I don't really want to redo all the pages in Frontpage, although know
that would result in a better and more efficient site. There are about 50
pages - each with about 12 photos and complicated tables!

Another question ... what is the difference in saving a Publisher document
(that has been converted to a web publication) as a "webpage" or as a
"single file webpage" . I can see that one saves the images in a separate
folder and one embeds the images and just saves a single file, but as far
as a customer viewing a website, what is different?
I added up the file sizes to compare (ie. the single file page with
embedded graphics compared to a page with graphics saved separately) and
the totals seem quite close. So what are the advantages/disadvantages?

cheers,
John

 

[David Bartosik [MSFT MVP]]

Yes. You can.

Thanks David. I was going to guess MHT, but you can't get there directly
from a Publisher 2000 web file. Are you saying that you can save as an MHT
directly from a Publisher 2003 file? Hummm...that could be handy.

DavidF

webpage:

generates a "site", i.e. htm files and supporting image files, with or
without organizing folder per option setting. This is the normal
procedure
to be used for creating and posting a web site.

single page:

generates a .mht file, also known as a "web archive file". The .mht file
format is exclusive to IE. You can open IE, browse to a page and go to a web
page, go to File, save as, select mht and it'll save that page as a
single
entity locally for you. I myself use this to save off order confirmation
pages or documentation pages that I want to save and file, versus printing.
The .mht file contains all the page elements and so can be viewed off
line
at any time. If you wanted to share a pub file with some one that did not
have Publisher to view the pub file then saving it as a mht and telling them
to view that in IE would be a good use for it. You should NOTgenerate mht
files and post those for a web site.

David Bartosik - [MSFT MVP]
www.publishermvps.com
www.davidbartosik.com

Hi again David,

thanks for the tip about Office SP1 for 2003. It seems to do a good job at
reducing the file sizes and I think it will fix my problem.
I don't really want to redo all the pages in Frontpage, although know
that would result in a better and more efficient site. There are about 50
pages - each with about 12 photos and complicated tables!

Another question ... what is the difference in saving a Publisher document
(that has been converted to a web publication) as a "webpage" or as a
"single file webpage" . I can see that one saves the images in a separate
folder and one embeds the images and just saves a single file, but as far
as a customer viewing a website, what is different?
I added up the file sizes to compare (ie. the single file page with
embedded graphics compared to a page with graphics saved separately)
and
the totals seem quite close. So what are the advantages/disadvantages?

cheers,
John

 

[js]

Hi David,

the way I have worked this is:

I designed a website in Frontpage for a client. He also wanted pages of his
products online and already had them done in Publisher as he sent them to a
printer for his printed catalogue.

I converted his Publisher pages (one at a time) to a web publication in
Publisher 2003 and then saved each of them as a "website" They are only
single pages so they have no internal links other than one I added to return
the user to the main (Frontpage) site.

I then copied the Publisher html page and its accompanying folder (created
by Publisher) to the approriate directory in the Frontpage website.
I then created links from the Frontpage site to each of the Publisher
created html pages.

The html of the Publisher pages is probably pretty awful and I had to play
around with his text and graphics A LOT to get them to line up as he had
done them in Publisher in three columns.

However, it looks ok and it saved weeks of work re-doing all his product
pages in Frontpage.

Thanks again for your tip about Office 2003 SP1 - that saved the day as the
resulting photo files are very much smaller. Thanks asloto David B for his
input.

cheers,

John