Yeah, certain people here like to give me edits that aren't tracked and it makes me nuts. And I miss half of them, because fuck that noise, I don't trust that they are that valuable! Except, of course when they are. Just track changes, people! I need better version control.

And I can see how if you're savvy, it would seem unfair that you can't just keep using track changes in Word or something!

The only problem is we can't assume all authors are that savvy. And it's really easy to just delete changes we made, and that isn't something that's tracked, not in the way that adding new text or deleting text is tracked. So if an author didn't like our edits and just went in and clicked the x to undo them, it wouldn't immediately be apparent when we opened the file. We would have to compare our version and the author's version line by line to see what had been changed, and that is too time-consuming. The volume of articles we have makes it impossible for that to be feasible.

scan it back in at a (meaningless) high resolution

Why is high resolution meaningless? The resolution affects how it prints.

Steph, given the minor degree of difficulty that a benign cyst like this presents, I'd say go with the general practitioner if it's up under the hairline. If there is some scarring (mine was next to unnoticeable until the secondary cyst started up and I got a bump), up under the hair no one will know.

For mine, in the middle of my forehead, I really wanted a dermatologist skilled in fancy stitching that would close the wound up nicely.

My forehead feels nice and flat again, even with the bandage on. But then I felt like I had Jupiter's Great Red Spot on before....

FWIW, I can't say I noticed anything!

My forehead feels nice and flat again, even with the bandage on. But then I felt like I had Jupiter's Great Red Spot on before....

Mine is pretty big; I'm just lucky it's under the hairline. I had no idea what it was when it showed up, and it freaked me out hard. My doctor said it was either a lipoma or a cyst, but it's not squishy, so probably not a lipoma. And then he gleefully said, "I can cut it off right here! ...I mean, I can excise the cyst in the office." He's hilarious. (For real; that's not sarcasm.)

The resolution is meaningless because the figure starts at a moderate resolution, loses information in the printing, and loses more information in the scanning. The higher resolution scan just ensures that you pick up every flaw in the paper and the printing process with absolute fidelity.

By definition, you have a lower information value figure. It is just tarted up by the stated resolution of the final scan.

The higher resolution scan just ensures that you pick up every flaw in the paper and the printing process with absolute fidelity.

Got it -- I misunderstood and thought you meant high resolution *in general* was meaningless. (I thought surely you didn't believe that, but my brain is so fried right now that no alternate option presented itself.)

One trick I've used to cheat with high resolution is to save an Excel-generated graph as a PDF and then output the PDF from Acrobat as a .tiff with a high resolution.

I should have said "Ask your daughter, dude."

Heee. I'm at my dad's place and he has an old college friend here - another guy who has known me my whole life. J has a Samsung phone one model older than my Samsung phone. He was struggling with something and handed it over to me to figure out. Which I did. Around a couple of 70 year olds, I'm the tech savy kid. Cool.

Someone from a task force working on a new chapter to our ongoing manual of practice sent us the information as a PDF. It's loaded with photos, charts, etc., that they downloaded (stole) from websites all over the place. (Some of the photos are meaningless and were inserted because they're pretty. They very helpfully (sarcasm font) sent a Word file with the images and links to the sites where they downloaded (stole) them.)

When we asked for a Word file of the actual text, they said they didn't have one ... that we should do the edits in the PDF. Which doesn't answer how we're going to get it into the same layout/format as the rest of the manual. And doesn't begin to address the blatant copyright violations they're insisting on.

Toddson, I share your pain. (They could send a Word doc with the images but NOT a Word doc of the text? A PDF has to be created from some source file -- that's nuts!)