Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 06:58:37 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
Subject: Re: Graphics Quality...jpg, png, tiff
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jan 2003 06:58:30 MET
Jim Weir wrote:
> With a couple of proprietary drafting packages (CM2K and Autosketch), I can only
> save images easily by "printing" them to .pdf and then going in to Acrobat and
> exporting them as jpg, png, or tiff formats.
> Presuming that I care less about file size (hard disks being dimes per meg these
> days), which of these formats should I use to preserve the maximum amount of
> detail in the image (some grayscale, some color)?
> One additional constraint is that I'm going to take whatever format I have and
> import it into Paintshop and save it as a bmp for import into my owner's
> Suggestions appreciated.
As mentionned in a previous answer the JPEG format is a lossy format, it
is very good for 'natural' pictures (photographs of the real world
(tm)), but very bad for computer generated graphics : straight edges
come blury and even surfaces bleed in each other.
The TIFF format is considered as a standard and can store all your data
up to 24bpp (maybe more in some variants, i'm not sure). The drawback is
that TIFF images are huge (really), since they are by default not
The PNG format can also store 24bpp in a lossless way (plus an alpha
channel which gives 32 bit effective depth), and uses a very efficient
compression algorithm to reduce file size while not altering the picture.
So choose PNG :o)
Why do you have to use BMP's in your manuals ? Most picture viewing
software, web browsers, etc can read PNG or JPEG formats.