Re: PDF or JPEG for map scanning?
"Voytek Eymont" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.user-groups.slug.chat |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>> Question: For line drawings should I get them scannned and saved as PDF >> or JPEG? >> >> Info: They range from A4 to 1.5m long x 1m wide. Mostly B/W and 300 dpi >> is fine. Purpose of the scanning is to provide access to the data and as >> anarchive in case library burns down. Number of maps ~ 200 >> + jpg: Small and can be easily edited/manipulated by Gimp etc. >> - jpg: I know that jpeg may have artefacts with lines and it was >> designed for continuous tone images such as photographs but maps are >> line drawings, though faded and smudged. - jpg: No size embedded in the >> image. It's just pixels wide x height. >> >> +pdf: Image size is embedded in scan. It will print at the correct size >> (which is important for maps). >> -pdf: Harder to post process. Imagemagick can convert to jpg via >> ghostscript. Windows users probably won't be able to rotate, crop or >> scale. Gimp does not handle PDF well. >> >> >> I have read at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format >> a bit about how PDF stores images. Answer=Many different ways. JPEG does >> it one way. Scanning as a TIFF I think will end up being too big in file >> sizes. >> >> Does anyone have any advice / experience here? I only scan A4 size docs, and, have no experience with larger sizes, but, I still think TIFF is the format to look at, I use TIFF-F for multi page docs -- Voytek -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html