From: G6JPG@255soft.uk   
      
   On Fri, 29 May 2020 at 14:06:27, knuttle    
   wrote:   
   >On 5/29/2020 12:39 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 29 May 2020 at 11:29:52, knuttle    
   >>wrote:   
   [snip]   
   >>> When it comes to pictures, I let the picture determine the   
   >>>resolution.  You can not scan resolution into a picture that natively   
   >>>is of low   
   >>  Though err on the generous side.   
   []   
   >I inherited some very old snap-shot take on a farm in Indiana he in the   
   >early 1930's?   They are small 2.5 X3.5 "  I was carefull scanning them   
   >and started to save them at scanner resolution. I looked at the   
   >pictures.  Even with a magnifying glass they were poorly resolved.   
   >That's when I made some decision about the resolution I scan pictures.   
      
   Indeed. Even assuming the developing and printing was OK (which it   
   usually was), the lens performance of the average box Brownie (or   
   whatever) - and, in particular, the skill of our ancestors at focusing!   
   (Especially with no focusing viewfinder) - _wasn't_ great. (And holding   
   the camera still!) But worth looking carefully at each one: even if most   
   _are_ fuzzy, there is the odd one where they just happen to have got it   
   right, and there _is_ fine detail.   
   []   
   >>> I use the PDf format as I find it is easier to navigate the page.   
   >>>And  it is easier to zoom part of it while still retaining the   
   >>>original  size for reference.   
   >>>   
   >> I think it depends very much on what viewer you are using. I use   
   >>IrfanView for almost everything to do with images, and find navigating   
   >>easy in it. YMMV as they say.   
   >   
   >I use Irfanview for everything.  Currently I am using the scanner   
   >software, but have used Irfanview as the software for the scanner. I   
      
   Yes, I use it with only the TWAIN driver for the scanner, not the actual   
   scanner software. (I don't think I've even installed the latter.)   
      
   >find Irfanview is easier to use for making multipage PDF documents than   
   >the free PDF printers.   
   >   
   >One thing I use Irfanview for is placing the citation information in   
   >the document images.  (Cntrl T)   Rather than maitain the citation   
   >information separately, I use the OCR addon, to convert the citation   
   >information back to text if I wish to send it to someone.   
      
   I use the JPEG comment feature (I then C) to add text. I rarely have   
   enough of it to need OCR, which is perhaps where we differ. [As for   
   those who bring out the garlic and crucifixes at any mention of JPEG -   
   yes, I know the theory; in practice, its image degradation is rarely a   
   problem or even visible. Ancestry, FindMyPast, and familysearch use it   
   for document images, so certainly anything I download from them I keep   
   in the format downloaded. Very occasionally I'll use GIF if I'm _really_   
   concerned about such matters; after reduction to 256 colours (rarely a   
   problem for document scans), GIF is lossless.]   
   >   
   >I scan or download the image, clean it up in Irfanview if necessary,   
   >add the text information, and save it as a PDF document.   
      
   I scan or download, crop, add comment, and save it as a JPEG.   
   >   
   >> What are you using to view PDFs?   
   >I use the Adobe Reader as for my PDF documents.  With the PDF document   
   >I know it will be reproduced the same regardless of where or when it is   
   >viewed.  It is a "permanent" format that can be viewed with out change   
   >on most OS, and computers.   
      
   I haven't fount a computer that couldn't view JPEGs for years either.   
   (Or GIF or BMP.)   
   >   
   >In addition to the easy of navigation, I can add text to the documents   
   >using the functions under Comments.   I can add sticky notes to items   
   >in the document.  For example if it is a Will, I will add a sticky note   
   >to the documentn where each of the people in the will are mentioned.   
   >With the Adobe read I can print it without the sticky notes.   
      
   That _is_ good. I don't have many documents of that nature. (Sometimes   
   if I'm passing a downloaded scan [which are nearly always greyscale   
   anyway, or even just B/W] to someone else, I might highlight the part   
   that contains their ancestor by boxing the relevant part then moving the   
   "blue" slider to full left [0] in IV, which has the result of   
   highlighting in yellow.)   
   >   
   >How do you "retain[ing] the original size for reference"   
   >   
   >If the size is important I will add it to the PDF as a Comment text.   
      
   Ah, when you said you were retaining the original size for reference, I   
   assumed you meant you viewed it on-screen as both full image and zoomed   
   in. If you just mean you keep a note of the original size in inches, I   
   can't think of a reason I've ever needed to do that - though as you say,   
   if I did I could add it as a (JPG in my case) comment.   
      
   >For a really important comment, I will make it permanent by printing   
   >the PDF to a PDF>   
      
   I consider JPG comments to be permanent - they survive the file being   
   moved, renamed, even emailed.   
   []   
   >> (Plus I just don't _like_ PDF for images, I'm not sure I could   
   >>explain  why.)   
      
   Thinking more about it - I think it's because I think of PDF as more for   
   documents than images. (I can extract images _from_ PDFs [I usually use   
   http://www.extractpdf.com/ ], so I don't think of PDF as a native image   
   format). But each to his own!   
   []   
   --   
   J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf   
      
   "Bother," said Pooh, as Eeyore sneezed the crack all over Owl.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)