excessive file sive in MSPublisher 2000

[Mike Hyndman]

A colleague has created a document in MSP2000 consisting of 14 pages
which contain approx 50 thumbnails (jpg) whose full size image only
amounts to 400K. The doc also contains two text boxes, one for each
thumbnail, one a picture title and the second one a one or two line
description.The document size is almost 600MGB, yet I can paste the
pictures into MS Word and the document is only 20MGB. Is MSP saving
multiple versions of the file to the file which would account for its
size and if so how can the file be made more manageable?
TIA
Mike H

 

[Mary Sauer]

Publisher 2000 doesn't support image compression
PUB2000: File Size Increases Unexpectedly When You Insert Picture
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;253973&Product=pub2000

 

[Brian Kvalheim - [MSFT MVP]]

Hi Mike Hyndman ([email protected]),
in the newsgroups
you posted:

|| A colleague has created a document in MSP2000 consisting of 14 pages
|| which contain approx 50 thumbnails (jpg) whose full size image only
|| amounts to 400K. The doc also contains two text boxes, one for each
|| thumbnail, one a picture title and the second one a one or two line
|| description.The document size is almost 600MGB, yet I can paste the
|| pictures into MS Word and the document is only 20MGB. Is MSP saving
|| multiple versions of the file to the file which would account for
|| its size and if so how can the file be made more manageable?

In addition to Mary's link, Publisher 2003 (current version) supports
compression, so you will see a *massive* file size reduction when using the
new version.
--
Brian Kvalheim
Microsoft Publisher MVP
http://www.publishermvps.com
~pay it forward~

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

Hi Mike Hyndman ([email protected]),
in the newsgroups
you posted:


In addition to Mary's link, Publisher 2003 (current version) supports
compression, so you will see a *massive* file size reduction when
using the new version.

You are assuming, of course, that they're running a supported OS (2000 SP3+,
Windows XP, Windows 2003 Server).

 

[Mike Hyndman]

Thanks to all who replied, the original document was actually created in
MSP2003, but it needed to be accessed in a PC only running MSP2000, so
it had to be saved in the earlier version.
When you speak of compression in P2003, what sort of percentage would
one expect in a file of this size (600MGB) considering it consists of
supposedly compressed jpg thumbnails and no more than a thousand words
of text?
Again, many thanks
Mike H

 

[Brian Kvalheim - [MSFT MVP]]

Hi Mike Hyndman ([email protected]),
in the newsgroups
you posted:

|| Thanks to all who replied, the original document was actually
|| created in MSP2003, but it needed to be accessed in a PC only
|| running MSP2000, so it had to be saved in the earlier version.
|| When you speak of compression in P2003, what sort of percentage would
|| one expect in a file of this size (600MGB) considering it consists of
|| supposedly compressed jpg thumbnails and no more than a thousand
|| words of text?
|| Again, many thanks
|| Mike H

The compressed jpgs would be improved in size, but the words of text
wouldn't matter. I have seen file sizes change in upwards of 90%. But it's
not an exact math as it depends on the compression of the existing images,
size, etc. I have had 50-60mb publisher files change to 4-5mb for example.

--
Brian Kvalheim
Microsoft Publisher MVP
http://www.publishermvps.com
~pay it forward~

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

 

[°°°MS°Publisher°°°]

You can expect a change of between 20% and 50% reduction in file size, with
the average hovering around 35%.

 

[Mike Hyndman]

Many thanks to all for your replies, will have to look at alternatives
for creation of this document even if we could get the size down by half
it would still take many hours to print on our system (and we need 50 +
copies)
Many thanks
Mike H

 

[Mike Hyndman]

Just created the same (or similar) document in MSWord2000 and it comes
out at "only" 26MGB. Bit different to the 600MGB in Publisher ;-)
MH

 

[JoAnn Paules]

Publisher is not Word. Neither is Word Publisher.

And that similar part can make the world of difference. Tell your
wife/sweetheart that the "diamond" ring you bought her is a CZ. Tell her
it's similar and see if she is okay with that. ;-) For the record, I prefer
real diamonds but lab-created rubies, sapphires, emeralds, and alexandrites.

 

[Brian Kvalheim - [MSFT MVP]]

Hi Mike Hyndman ([email protected]),
in the newsgroups
you posted:

|| Just created the same (or similar) document in MSWord2000 and it
|| comes out at "only" 26MGB. Bit different to the 600MGB in Publisher
|| ;-)
|| MH

I bet if I had the space, I could test that Publisher 2000 file in Publisher
2002/2003 and it might be a similar size to your Word document.
--
Brian Kvalheim
Microsoft Publisher MVP
http://www.publishermvps.com
~pay it forward~

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

 

[Mike Hyndman]

I bet if I had the space, I could test that Publisher 2000 file in Publisher
2002/2003 and it might be a similar size to your Word document.

Brian,
The file was originally created in WSP2002 but had to be saved as a
MSP2000 version for printing on our network, but as an earlier post
said, the average compression which could be expected in MSP2003 was
<>35% which would give us a file of 210MGB not 26MGb (96/97% reduction)
Could this be achieved in MSP200*?
Many thanks
MH

 

[Mike Hyndman]

Publisher is not Word. Neither is Word Publisher.

And that similar part can make the world of difference. Tell your
wife/sweetheart that the "diamond" ring you bought her is a CZ. Tell her
it's similar and see if she is okay with that. ;-) For the record, I prefer
real diamonds but lab-created rubies, sapphires, emeralds, and alexandrites.

In this case it's the hard copy that counts, and if it can be produced
in a fashion which is almost indistinguishable from a file that's 30
times smaller, with all that entails, then so be it. Word may not be as
click featured/template wizarded as Publisher but with a little
tweakingand knowledge it is capable of producing results not too
dissimilar to Publisher.
Diamnds? CZ? If the ring I bought my wife was metal she would think I
had been up to no good and had someting to hide ;-)
MH

 

[Ed Bennett]

A small child turns to Ed, and exclaims: "Look! Look! A post from Mike

In this case it's the hard copy that counts,

If it's the hard copy that counts, filesize has no bearing at all.

and if it can be produced
in a fashion which is almost indistinguishable from a file

Producing similar files in Word is not done in the same fashion as in
Publisher. There is a lot more pain.

that's 30
times smaller, with all that entails, then so be it.

What does that entail? The same sized file goes to the print spooler...

Anyway, if you created a PDF file using Adobe Acrobat or one of the free
alternatives, you will end up with much smaller files again.

And just as an FYI, there is no such thing as a MGB.
MB = MegaByte = 1024 KB = 1024 x 1024 bytes
GB = GigaByte = 1024 MB = 1024 x 1024 KB = 1024 x 1024 x 1024 bytes

 

[Brian Kvalheim - [MSFT MVP]]

Hi Mike Hyndman ([email protected]),
in the newsgroups
you posted:

||| I bet if I had the space, I could test that Publisher 2000 file in
||| Publisher 2002/2003 and it might be a similar size to your Word
||| document.
|| Brian,
|| The file was originally created in WSP2002 but had to be saved as a
|| MSP2000 version for printing on our network, but as an earlier post
|| said, the average compression which could be expected in MSP2003 was
|| <>35% which would give us a file of 210MGB not 26MGb (96/97%
|| reduction) Could this be achieved in MSP200*?

I never said 35%. That was someone else. I have seen reduction in size *as*
high as 1000% (and lower of course). Can you ftp the file onto a server at
all, and I can see what size Publisher 2003 saves it as? You could zip it
and upload it. Then supply me with the ftp link.
--
Brian Kvalheim
Microsoft Publisher MVP
http://www.publishermvps.com
~pay it forward~

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers no rights.

 

[JoAnn Paules]

Sounds like you live up to the reputation of being a "Mike".

 

[Ed Bennett]

A small child turns to Ed, and exclaims: "Look! Look! A post from Brian

I never said 35%. That was someone else. I have seen reduction in
size *as* high as 1000% (and lower of course).

So the filesize went from 1MB to MINUS NINE MB??
So when you saved the file, it made space on the disk?
You oughta make a few thousand copies of that file - turn your 50GB disk
into an 80GB disk!
Say... can you email it to me? )

 

[°°°MS°Publisher°°°]

Who hijacked this thread and took it off topic. We were discussing Paul
Robeson.

What is the world coming to!

 

[Mike Koewler]

JoAnn,

A bunch of Mikes I know use a program where the file size is smaller
than the sum of the images placed in it.

Another Mike

 

[Mike Hyndman]

If it's the hard copy that counts, filesize has no bearing at all.

It does when it can be achieved with a 95% smaller file.

Producing similar files in Word is not done in the same fashion as in
Publisher. There is a lot more pain.

Didn't say there wouldn't be, it's horses for courses but in this case
it was achievable.

What does that entail? The same sized file goes to the print spooler...

Faster print times, faster loading, access etc., in short, more
efficient working.

Anyway, if you created a PDF file using Adobe Acrobat or one of the free
alternatives, you will end up with much smaller files again.

And just as an FYI, there is no such thing as a MGB.
MB = MegaByte = 1024 KB = 1024 x 1024 bytes
GB = GigaByte = 1024 MB = 1024 x 1024 KB = 1024 x 1024 x 1024 bytes

Pedantic?
Many thanks
MH