Filesizes INDD in comparison to PM7

[RLie]

Hi,
I have lots of experience with PM7 and want to migrate to INDD.
I work a lot over the internet so i frequently use linked references to graphics to limit the filesize of the pm7-document.
INDD seems to have the same option: link instead of embed; but the resulting filesize of the INDD-file is 3 or 4 time bigger than the corresponding pm7-file.......
Can anyone explain to me why INDD uses so many bytes to store screen versions of externaly linked graphics....is it avoidable?

thanks for any help....

 

[RLie]

Your not much help, hot shot top experts....

 

[viol8ion]

Wise@ss... we are forums, not application engineers. Ask the people that WROTE the program and maybe they could tell you, but with an attitude like that, I wouldn't hold my breath.

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

well, that does not help either...
me neither, i dont expect awnsers from the writers...
that is exactly why i asked this question in this forum so i can discuss it with others....if one cannot do this, or there is no reaction at all, what is the use of this forum?

But, never mind and although i might be a wise@ss...you must have noticed that file sizes in IND are very big...
some 13Mb instead of 3Mb for pm7 is a serious problem for me when i want to send over the internet...
or am i doing something wrong? i place mostly jpg's (linked and not embedded)

 

[viol8ion]

Actually, I am finding quite the opposite. I recently converted from PM65 to ID2 this past year. In loooking at file sizes from my P65 docs and the same documents converted over to INDD, the ID files are smaller in most cases. I see one instance otherwise.

I don't know if the fact that you are using JPG can factor in. It is generally recommended that you avoid JPG for DTP applications as the format is lossy. Linking is the way to go, are you using File>Place or Ctrl D to place the files? Never copy/paste, as that will cause you grief.

Are you comparing 2 files that are exactly similar to see what the file size differences are?

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

That is funny...you are finding the opposite
okay..i did an other little test (i always place files with Place (or ctlr-D)not copy/paste...

i create a new doc and save it immediatly (so it is an empty A4-doc) in both programs

than i place in these empty docs one jpg of 2854 bytes
than i place in these empty docs one tiff of 605 bytes

and the results are:
pm7 ind2
empty 198 684 bytes
with jpg 116 1284 bytes
with tiff 126 848 bytes

(all graphics where linked, when i embed them, file sizes increase enormously)
So..ind seems very much bigger in my tests. I use jpg mainly because their file sizes on disk are much smaller than tiffs.
Unfortunatly ind seems to unpack them so i loose this size advantage of jpg.

I did notice in these tests that indesign give a screendisplay of the graphics that is much higher quality than pm7 does....but i don't need such a high screenquality.
Do you think that one can reduce the screenquality in IND?

 

[viol8ion]

Yes, you can decrease screen display in INDD, although I doubt that would make much difference. It might, however, if ID maintains the image info as part of the file.

It is interesting that there is a larger difference in size with the JPG than the TIF.

The size difference you are seeing is very minimal, at best, and likely has to do with the file information that is required by ID for the layout. ID has advanced layout and typesetting info, more so than PM ever came close to, I would imagine that answers for some of the differences.

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

oups...i think you did not understand my little table:
where one jpg in the pm7 doc took 116 bytes, the same jpg in the IND-doc took 1284 bytes. That is 10 times as much! That is not very minimal to me..
(funny is that the PM7 doc actually decreases a little when i place the first graphic, i never did completely understand how pm varies in file size; but that is not the problem at this point)

SO, One can decrease display quality in IND? Can you explain how to do this...it might be the solution

 

[viol8ion]

I did understand... I said the JPG was larger than the TIF in INDD, whch was curious. The tiff was only 722K, which may be due to the size of the image preview info in the document.

It is possible that it is more work for INDD to create a quality preview for a JPG. Of course, this is all guessing, I could be all wet. I do know that JPGs are definately discouraged for any professional use, and ID is a professional app. The only 2 graphics files that are encouraged are TIFF and EPS, and native AI or PSD is also supported much better than PM7 ever did.

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

Yes, okay..thanks for your thoughts......

(Pagemaker is not dead yet, it just smells funny....)

 

[jimoblak]

The legend (since we can only guess) has been that InDesign generates a single type of JPG preview for screen display. TIFs and JPGs come in several flavors offering different compression. It would be logical for a JPG preview of an LZW bitmap TIFF to grow larger in size than the original TIFF.

I have not found a way to avoid this bloat or apply any type of control over the filesize of preview images in ID2.

A quick test showed a blank INDD document was 116 kb. A placed 3 kb RGB JPG resulted in an INDD document of 88 kb.

Go figure.

I understand the frustration with sending larger files online. But how many of us are still using 800 kb double density disks? Files are going to keep growing in size. Upgrade your internet access when you upgrade your DTP app.

- - picklefish - -

Why is everyone in this forum responding to me as picklefish?

 

[viol8ion]

Also, InDesign converts to PDF so easily (kicks PM's butt in the Export tp PDF arena!) that if you require proofing, you can bring that 1284 byte file down to 40 bytes easily.

If you are sending the files for editing, then it is always a good idea to ZIP or SIT the files just because of the possibility of file corruption if you email them uncompressed.

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

Hi, to all of you....
JUST FOR INFORMATION
I recently upgraded to Indesign CS (=3.0) .....
and my file size problem has been solved completely...
Where indesign files saved as .indd are at least 2 times bigger than equivalent pm7 files Indesign CS has introduced the option to export as Indesign Interchange file (.inx) leaving out the useless preview versions of graphics.

It has been done to ensure compatibility from Indesign 3 down to Indesign 2 (says the help-function, but who wants to do that?). I use this option now to save my files and send them fast over the internet.

As an example:
My PM7 file was 7 MB
The same file as INDD file went to 13MB
and my INX file became 700KB !!!

Ofcoarse the reciever of the .INX file should have exactly the same Graphics stored in the same place on his machine.

So now i can migrate from PM to Indesign for sure..

 

[viol8ion]

Interesting, especially since the last I heard IDcs files cannot be back-saved or converted to CS2.0. I haven't made the move to upgrade yet, even tho cs seems to have a ton of new features that make it worth it.

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

Well it is possible to back-save from 3 to 2. And it is funny to see that one cannot always UPgrade from a prerelease 2 to 3....
but who cares...

CS is really much better....

 

[viol8ion]

http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/322be.htm

I knew I was right, ID cs cannot be back saved to ID2, here it is right from Adobe's site!

This has been mentioned in the Adobe forums, too, many times. Adobe's literature first claimed the backwards compatibility, but they were unable to make it work in this release.

When in doubt, deny all terms and defnitions.

http://www.wuli.com

 

[RLie]

Oh boy,
this does worry me. I hope the INX file option will continue to exist, for it my only escape to create small indesign files to send over the internet....(in my little village ADSL is still no option)

thanks