Most widely available lossless format for documents?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zarbol Tsar
  • Start date Start date
8 bit tiff with no compression would get my vote, if you insist on
"lossless". If you can accept a lossy format, then jpegs.
Click to expand...

Hello Bill, I just replied to this thread saying that I have the
following options when I create a TIFF using ACDSee 3. I do not have
anything for 8 bit. Should I use some other applicatin than ACDSee 3
or will TIFF usually be 8 bit?

Compression:
CCITT Group 3
CCITT Group 3
LZW
Deflate
JP EG

Resolution
horizontal .... (dpi)
vertical ... (dpi)
 
[ Crossposting trimmed ]
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.periphs.scanners.]
Dots Per Inch. Fax on "quality" setting is usually 200 dpi. Inkjet
and laser printers nowadays start at 300 dpi, although 600 dpi for
Click to expand...
When I go to create a TIFF using ACDSee 3.1 I get the following
options *before* the TWAIN menu appears. Presumably these parameters
are [passed] to the TWAIN software?
Click to expand...

Not quite. I'd guess only the "resolution" setting gets passed to the
scanner itself, and the scanner delivers a raw bitmap scanned at X by Y
DPI. The "compression" setting is applied to the raw bitmap when you
save the file.
Compression:
CCITT Group 3, CCITT Group 3, LZW, Deflate, JPEG
Click to expand...

? Did you make a typo here? I'd guess that one of these was "Group 4",
'cause it doesn't make sense for Group 3 to be listed twice.
Resolution
horizontal - default 96 dpi vertical - default 96 dpi

What should I select from the above to get:
(a) the most compact resultant TIFF file?
Click to expand...

You need to ask "Which resolution and color depth should I scan at?"
first. The answer to that question depends on your final use for the
images. If you say, "I am going to use these images for $FOO", then
someone will be able to advise you. The smallest TIFFs result from low
resolution black-and-white scans compressed with Group4. The smallest
TIFFs in grayscale/color result from low resolution scans compressed
with LZW.
(b) the most common compression in order that most users can read the
TIFF file?
Click to expand...

This question has been addressed several times already. Well, I'll
repeat myself: Deflate is inefficient and not everything understands
it, so forget it. G3 is inefficient compared to G4, so forget it. Not
many programs understand JPEG-TIFF right now, so forget it.

That leaves G4 and LZW. Use LZW for grayscale or color. Use G4 for
black-and-white. 'Doze XP, 2K, 9x, and even NT 4 came with "Kodak
Imaging", which can read G4 and LZW TIFFs without a problem. OS X has a
TIFF-viewer built in, which understands G4 and LZW. Unix-like OSes have
ImageMagick, xv, Kuickshow, and Eye Of GNOME, all of which understand
every common image format including G4 and LZW TIFFs. That covers all
the OSes you're likely to run into, so there's no problem with the
image-viewing software.

If the people you're sending images to have no idea what to open a TIFF
with, tell them "Start->Programs->Accessories->Imaging" if they're using
'Doze. You shouldn't have to educate people like that, but dumb people
and misconfigured 'Doze machines are endemic problems.
 
not really, when you consider that this is how all printers are
measured, mainly so the printer manufacturers can gauge how much ink
will be required to print X number of pages at Xdpi (with the notable
exception of Laser Printers and other "toner" based products)
For instance a document in, say, Photoshop, is measured at 300 dpi, and
also 8.5"x11", the dimensions of the document in pixels will be widly
different than a document at a lower dpi say, 200 with the same print
dimensions.
 
8 bit tiff with no compression would get my vote, if you insist on
Zarbol Tsar writes ...

Hello Bill, I just replied to this thread saying that I have the
following options when I create a TIFF using ACDSee 3. I do not have
anything for 8 bit.
Click to expand...

Hi Zarbol, if they don't give you a choice in the menu then it's almost
certainly 8 bit/channel, unless your input was 16 bit. Easy way to
check is to generate a file and open it in Photoshop and do Image >
Mode and see whether 8 bits/chanel or 16 bits/channel is checked.
Compression:
LZW
Deflate
JPEG
Click to expand...

Non-jpeg compression of tiffs is lossless and will make it smaller
(generally 30-60% the original file size, on the type of files I shoot)
but will make it less likely that the recepient can open it easily.
Jpeg is not lossless but a high-quality jpeg should be about 1/3 or so
the size of the original (and a highly compressed one often 1/20th of
so the byte count of the original) and will still have pretty good
quality for most needs. You can always send jpegs and if they want a
high rez version of a particular file send them that later. This is
how a lot of magazine submissions are done these days and what I'd do
unless you knew they HAD to have tiffs and had a non-dial up connection
to handle the long download times.

Bill
 
PDF. There is a lossless and lossy way for PDF to encode images. Make
sure it is doing it lossless. Other than that, GIF is your best bet.
Click to expand...

GIF is not lossless! If you have more than 255 colors, it loses colors!
 
Adam.Verizon said:
not really, when you consider that this is how all printers are
measured, mainly so the printer manufacturers can gauge how much ink
will be required to print X number of pages at Xdpi (with the notable
exception of Laser Printers and other "toner" based products)
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Pure nonsense. It's pixels and that's all there is to it.
 
Nobody writes ...
GIF is the best choice
Click to expand...

Not really ...
with one caveat: Avoid all bit depths other than 256 for
maximum compatibility
Click to expand...

A "bit depth" of 256 would indeed do the trick. Unfortunately GIF's
bit depth is only 8 bits, limiting you to 256 gradations or colors. By
comparison jpegs are 8 bits/channel with three channels, so 24 bits
total, giving you over 16 million colors.

This is why gifs are best suited for line art or cartoons or images
with few colors and why jpegs are better for true color, like in photo
images.
 
"Bill Hilton" stated:
"...
Unfortunately GIF's bit depth is only 8 bits, limiting you to 256
gradations or colors
...."

However ... and I don't think that anyone has mentioned this yet ... GIF
files can be saved with either a fixed palette, or using the so-called
"Adaptive Palette." If the image file is saved with one of the fixed
palettes (such as the "Windows Palette"), it may have (for example)
something like only six levels of gray, and so forth!

GIF is somewhat deceptive, and almost always destructive in some way.
Particularly with continuous tone (photographic) images. Best to avoid
unless it is absolutely necessary (such as "for the web").
 
This is why gifs are best suited for line art or cartoons or images
with few colors and why jpegs are better for true color, like in photo
images.
Click to expand...

Don't forget edge handling ability.
 
John said:
That would be wrong. JPEG is far more common.
Click to expand...

Au contraire. OS X and Windows have multiformat viewers (incl varieties
of single & multipage TIFF) as standard. And of course, TIFF viewers
are available (often standard) in all varieties of Linux.

--Toby
 
Bill Hilton said:
Nobody writes ...
Click to expand...
Not really ...
Click to expand...

^^^ missing "colors"
A "bit depth" of 256 would indeed do the trick. Unfortunately GIF's
bit depth is only 8 bits, limiting you to 256 gradations or colors. By
comparison jpegs are 8 bits/channel with three channels, so 24 bits
total, giving you over 16 million colors.

This is why gifs are best suited for line art or cartoons or images
with few colors and why jpegs are better for true color, like in photo
images.
Click to expand...

Which makes it a good choice for what the poster asked (text, not full
color photos).
 
Of course, if the original has less than 257 unique colours then GIF would
suffice.
Click to expand...
However, text should be saved as text - an OCR program can translate an
image-of-text into text.
Click to expand...

Really? If it's handwritten? Mathematical equations? Different
language?
 
nobody said:
^^^ missing "colors"



Which makes it a good choice for what the poster asked (text, not full
color photos).
Click to expand...
The whole problem of not being able to open a graphic file can be solved
very easily by installing the free Irfanview program and plug-ins. Irfanview
will open about every image or graphic file format, currently known.
http://www.irfanview.com

The best lossless graphic file format and most widely used is TIFF. TIFF
will do B&W(bitmap), 8 bit or 16 bit gray scale and full color.
 
CSM1 said:
The whole problem of not being able to open a graphic file can be solved
very easily by installing the free Irfanview program and plug-ins. Irfanview
will open about every image or graphic file format, currently known.
http://www.irfanview.com

The best lossless graphic file format and most widely used is TIFF. TIFF
will do B&W(bitmap), 8 bit or 16 bit gray scale and full color.
Click to expand...
TIFF will also do multiple pages.

Jpeg is a lossy format and great for web pictures, which may be the most
popular image format used.
 
Thank you for an interesting reply. There is a lot of useful
information in what you have written.

One point in particular stands out and please do *not* read this as
nit-picking what you wrote:


'Doze XP, 2K, 9x, and even NT 4 came with "Kodak
Imaging", which can read G4 and LZW TIFFs without a problem.
Click to expand...


When I search Google I read that brand new XP systems do not have
Kodak Imaging but XP systems which were upgraded from NT do have it.

Eg. "if you have a brand new Windows XP installation, Imaging is
nowhere to be found. Unfortunately, Microsoft didn't relicense the
Imaging application from Kodak for inclusion with Windows XP."
http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-6270-5034679.html

Also: "Kodak Imaging for Windows Is Not Included with Windows XP"
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;308979

---

So this leaves me with a question in my mind that what you recommend
assumes Kodak Imaging is available to XP users. As it seems Kodak
Imaging is probably not available then what changes would you make to
the recommendations in your last posting? (Copied below in the sig
for your convienience.)

Thank you.

Zarbol

--
(b) the most common compression in order that most users can
read the TIFF file?
Click to expand...

This question has been addressed several times already. Well,
I'll repeat myself: Deflate is inefficient and not everything
understands it, so forget it. G3 is inefficient compared to G4,
so forget it. Not many programs understand JPEG-TIFF right now,
so forget it.

That leaves G4 and LZW. Use LZW for grayscale or color. Use G4
for black-and-white. 'Doze XP, 2K, 9x, and even NT 4 came with
"Kodak Imaging", which can read G4 and LZW TIFFs without a
problem. OS X has a TIFF-viewer built in, which understands G4
and LZW. Unix-like OSes have ImageMagick, xv, Kuickshow, and Eye
Of GNOME, all of which understand every common image format
including G4 and LZW TIFFs. That covers all the OSes you're
likely to run into, so there's no problem with the image-viewing
software.
 
One point in particular stands out and please do *not* read this as
nit-picking what you wrote:
Click to expand...

This is Usenet; nitpicking and pedantry are how things get done.
When I search Google I read that brand new XP systems do not have
Kodak Imaging but XP systems which were upgraded from NT do have it.
Eg. "if you have a brand new Windows XP installation, Imaging is
nowhere to be found. Unfortunately, Microsoft didn't relicense the
Imaging application from Kodak for inclusion with Windows XP."
http://techrepublic.com.com/5100-6270-5034679.html
Click to expand...
So this leaves me with a question in my mind that what you recommend
assumes Kodak Imaging is available to XP users. As it seems Kodak
Imaging is probably not available then what changes would you make to
the recommendations in your last posting?
Click to expand...

Hm. Right; if 'DozeXP doesn't include Imaging, it certainly includes
some sort of application that's capable of viewing TIFFs in G4 or LZW.
When I was in Chennai last July, the folks at the place I was visiting
were all running vanilla 'DozeXP with a minimum of 3rd-party apps
installed, and they had no problems opening and viewing G4 and LZW TIFFs
without installing any other software. The company I theoretically work
for uses 2K, not XP, for workstations, and I won't pay the exorbitant
price for XP just to use it on my personal machines when Gentoo supports
all my hardware and has all the software I need/want.

The SGI TIFF library is under a BSD-like license, so even if a TIFF
viewer wasn't bundled with 'DozeXP, a competent programmer could put
together a simple TIFF viewer in a day. Of course, since the free-beer
Irfanview and free-speech Win32 ImageMagick exist, that'd be like
reinventing the wheel.
 
Echo most of that ... with the caveat that both IrfanView and ImageMagic
are truly ***EXCELLENT*** software!
 
Back
Top