76
General Software Discussion / Re: djvu: an alternative to scanned pdfs?
« Last post by mikiem on August 09, 2007, 06:22 PM »Well, looking at the testimonials page, the 1st thing I saw was an assortment of typos... For archiving purposes I'd want the providers to have an overwhelming obsession with detail, rather than a "good enough" mind set. 
The second thing I saw is that it was developed by ATT, which is cool I guess from a tech viewpoint, but a bit worrisome when it comes to legal. Are viewers going to be available years from now, or the victim of lawsuits like the Lucent MS mp3 stuff?
The Wikipedia article was interesting, but misleading... PDF docs are made by a lot of different software since Adobe opened it up a bit. PDFs are text when text is available, often raster otherwise. In fact, AFAIK there's still no universally great trace software to convert scanned, raster images to vector. In that sense the comparison is faulty, as are stated size differences.
Common thought with video seems to be to retain the original, simply because the delivery format is subject to change over years. It makes sense to me to take the same approach with documents -- archive the original scans, save the OCR if performed, and use a compressed format for viewing.

The second thing I saw is that it was developed by ATT, which is cool I guess from a tech viewpoint, but a bit worrisome when it comes to legal. Are viewers going to be available years from now, or the victim of lawsuits like the Lucent MS mp3 stuff?
The Wikipedia article was interesting, but misleading... PDF docs are made by a lot of different software since Adobe opened it up a bit. PDFs are text when text is available, often raster otherwise. In fact, AFAIK there's still no universally great trace software to convert scanned, raster images to vector. In that sense the comparison is faulty, as are stated size differences.
Common thought with video seems to be to retain the original, simply because the delivery format is subject to change over years. It makes sense to me to take the same approach with documents -- archive the original scans, save the OCR if performed, and use a compressed format for viewing.

Recent Posts
), I'd say part of it was the codec implementation Camtasia used, though that is just a guess. I opened a flv I had (the actual Shockwave format video in an SWF) and it was in the 17,000 kb range. If you watch TaskMgr though you'll also see the memory usage go up along with frame numbers... The linked video has a large frame, & as the amount of visual data increases, so does the memory to hold it.

Any ol' way, & FWIW of course, I've got 98SE, XP Pro, & Vista H/Prem on hdd, Linux on removable disc. 
enjoy 
