15 Feb
2010
15 Feb
'10
11:51 a.m.
Thanks for the lesson, but I am quite aware of those
points already and
I was pretty clear when I posted and said that my source documentation
was a raster image. I'm using PDF for ease of distribution.
Also, I object to the redefinition of "100% zoom" in Acrobat Reader,
which was the source of my confusion last night. I was looking for
confirmation that this is indeed the behavior that PDF viewers have.
I wasn't really trying to be pedantic. If you really want tools that natively and
in the user interface constantly refer back to pixels in the original scan, then
you really have to stick to formats that are innately raster based.
TIFF, PNG, etc.
I maintain my scanned images as PNG's. I used to have a real hatred for
PDF's as a way of showing raster bitmaps but have learned to
respect my enemy in this case :-).
(Incidentally I am still a big fan of SVG despite Adobe's abandonment of
it.)
I think at least some of the TIFF formats can contain tags for how
large each pixel was in the original source. Don't know how standard
vs proprietary these tags are.
Good multi-page PDF viewers are freely available. The free, distributed with
the OS, TIFF viewers by contrast are perhaps even suckier than they were
a decade ago.
Tim.