Huh. I'm surfing the web and watching CPU usage on my work XP machine (two point something Ghz, 1 Gig RAM.) Firefox does take more CPU than I think it should. When I go to scifi.com (which always has a shitload of animated graphics which pegs the CPU usage on my G3 iBook), the usage on my XP box is still averages around 70%. It seems to average around 30 % on IE 6.0.
I, for one, wasn't looking forward to starting my day with a slaughter. Which, really, just goes to show how much I've grown
Anya ,'Sleeper'
Buffistechnology 2: You Made Her So She Growls?
Got a question about technology? Ask it here. Discussion of hardware, software, TiVos, multi-region DVDs, Windows, Macs, LINUX, hand-helds, iPods, anything tech related. Better than any helpdesk!
tommyrot - Dec 21, 2005 5:48:18 am PST #6104 of 10003
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
§ ita § - Dec 21, 2005 8:29:00 am PST #6105 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Can someone help me with PDF creation? I'm printing to Distiller and can't not get rid of the JPG jaggies. It's just amping all the artifacts, even though I'm doing everything I can to not compress the images. Is Distiller the problem? I'm pretty sure my home machine will print to PDF without Distiller, but I don't have this option here.
Ginger - Dec 21, 2005 8:35:23 am PST #6106 of 10003
"It didn't taste good. It tasted soooo horrible. It tasted like....a vodka martini." - Matilda
I've got Acrobat, ita.
DXMachina - Dec 21, 2005 8:36:30 am PST #6107 of 10003
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I'm assuming you've already set image quality to "maximum."
How many DPI are the images? If the pdf is being created at a higher DPI than the original images, then they'll look jagged.
§ ita § - Dec 21, 2005 8:57:59 am PST #6108 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
The images are 72 DPI. Let me make sure that's the PDF resolution.
§ ita § - Dec 21, 2005 9:03:03 am PST #6109 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Thanks, DX! Some of them still look mildly crappy onscreen (as opposed to all and very), but they print much more cleanly.
Jon B. - Dec 21, 2005 9:11:58 am PST #6110 of 10003
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
If you're printing the PDF, then 72dpi images will look crappy printed irrespective of the "PDF resolution" (I'm not sure what that means -- text is resolution independent). Ideally, you want the images to be 300dpi, although less than that can look OK.
§ ita § - Dec 21, 2005 9:15:08 am PST #6111 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I'm not sure what that means -- text is resolution independent
Text is, PDFs aren't. There is indeed a driver setting for the PDF resolution.
I printed an image from the file, and it looked decent. That's all I care about.
Jon B. - Dec 21, 2005 9:24:56 am PST #6112 of 10003
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
I think that if a PDF is entirely text and other vector-based elements, then it is resolution independent. I've opened PDFs in Photoshop and Photoshop has asked me what resolution I want to open it at.
§ ita § - Dec 21, 2005 9:32:45 am PST #6113 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I think that if a PDF is entirely text and other vector-based elements, then it is resolution independent
Can't say. All I know is mine are not, and switching it helped.