Re: need help with distiller error

On 9/3/06 8:05 AM, "Lee Blevins" wrote:

Anti-JPEG compression attitudes are like the early anti-PDF views.

I strongly disagree. There are very good reasons to avoid a file format (or
compression) that intentionally discards pixels in an image. There is
absolutely no reason to worry about a properly created portable document.

They are based on fear and ignorance and can't be based on facts
observed from the use of JPEG Compression.

The fear of PDF was and is based on fear and ignorance, I agree. But it is a
fact that JPG compression cumulatively degrades images. You know that.

To say you see artifacts in JPEG images is a half-truth. There are
different levels of JPEG comression and while you may see an artifact at
a full detail view on a monitor doesn't mean it will be visible to the
human eye on a printed page.

One, maybe even two or three passes through JPG compression, fine. But
telling customers to use JPG without warning them of the potential problems
would be considered more of a "half-truth" than anything I've posted.

It's kind of like the beer experts insistance that one beer is better.
Most who make this claim can't pass a blind taste test. The same is true
of JPEG compression. With proofs placed on a table in front of you most
would not be able to find the JPEG compressed images except in the cases
of maxiumum compression.

The taste of beer has nothing to do with the _fact_ that JPG compression is
lossy and cumulative. You can't make an analogy that compares someone's
opinion with a fact: apples to oranges.

It's time to leave the 1990's pre-press views and realize some major
changes have taken place.

They are:

1. Use of RGB is now commonplace and in many cases a better color space.

This one's hard for me. I'm working on it, but my brain thinks ink, not
light. I do see the huge benefits for pushing the conversion all the way to
the end of the process. It makes perfect sense.

2. PDF rules the world now - sending native docs is for novices.

I couldn't agree more.

3. JPEG compression is ubiquitous - everybody is using it.

Lots of folks are smoking crack, too.

4. Color management is no longer an option, it's a necessity.

I agree to a degree.

5. Film is dead.

What's film? ;)

Happy Labor Day! Now do some Labor, will 'ya! ;)

Tim



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Differential intra-interchannel filters for RGB images lossless compression
    ... >>> However IMHO many photographic images are even slightly more difficult ... don't look right, lighting doesn't look right, surfaces are almost always ... compression, it seems concievable to me that they could. ... would likely be able to fairly accurately predict the pixel. ...
    (comp.compression)
  • Re: The future (or lack thereof?) of CDs
    ... audio with regard to compression, ... produce images to match the quality of large format images produced by ... generation seems to witness this compaction: recently from 4x5 inch ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: JPEG Lossless decompression
    ... I have the viewer to the point were I support all common ... formats except compressed images, which is my next area of work. ... that will allow more compression types to be support later with little ...
    (comp.protocols.dicom)
  • Re: Image size publisher 2003
    ... Then go to one or more of the images, ... Publisher file, and producing it with a second Publisher file, and ... When I pre view as a webpage it works great, but when I upload to server ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: JPEG Lossless decompression
    ... I have the viewer to the point were I support all common ... formats except compressed images, which is my next area of work. ... AFAIK JBIG is not available (black/white jpeg compression). ...
    (comp.protocols.dicom)