Howdy Folks,

I am writing a longish report that will contain approximately 50 figures
and several tables. The 50 figures will be maps made in ArcView GIS
software. I can export those maps as EPS or EMF files and to my eye,
they both look very good when printed from within Word. The maps have an
aerial photo background with various vector and text data mixed in. Both
the EPS and EMF files are roughly the same size (+/- 10%).

So, of those two formats, what would you recommend for inclusion as
linked images in a Word Document?

Other potentially useful info: My report will have 50 to 60 pages of
text, and each image will occupy a single page. Let's say this thing
will be approximately 120 pages in total. Are 50 images anything to
worry about?

Thanks in advance for any help,

Tom Campitelli

Hi Thomas

Thomas Campitelli wrote:
I am writing a longish report that will contain approximately 50 figures
and several tables. The 50 figures will be maps made in ArcView GIS
software. I can export those maps as EPS or EMF files and to my eye,
they both look very good when printed from within Word. The maps have an
aerial photo background with various vector and text data mixed in. Both
the EPS and EMF files are roughly the same size (+/- 10%).

Do the EPS contain prefiew images? Does Word (which version) display the
previews or the originals (zoom in and you'll know).


So, of those two formats, what would you recommend for inclusion as
linked images in a Word Document?

I'm kind of unbiased there. EPS would have been my choice a couple of
years ago, but only if working with PS printer drivers exclusively (best
bet for not messing up the pictures at output time). I've worked with
linked WMF (slide-wise exported from PowerPoint) at times, and found it
OK, too. The chance for Word to tear anything apart in an EPS seems
still smaller compared to WMF/EMF.


Other potentially useful info: My report will have 50 to 60 pages of
text, and each image will occupy a single page. Let's say this thing
will be approximately 120 pages in total. Are 50 images anything to
worry about?

Linked, then certainly not. And if anything goes havoc (read: "red
cross" etc.), you can always re-insert a link.

I suggest

Creating a Template (Part II, by John McGhie)
http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/Customizat...platePart2.htm

for your bedtime reader, and there are a ton of other useful articles on
the mvp site, of course.

2cents
Robert
--
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | MS
\ / | MVP
X Against HTML | for
/ \ in e-mail & news | Word

Do the EPS contain prefiew images? Does Word (which version) display the
previews or the originals (zoom in and you'll know).

There are no preview images in these files. Each EPS (or EMF) will be on
the order of 1.5 MB. I am using Word 2000 and when I scroll by the
image, I see a little progress bar as the EPS filter runs. However, it
only shows a bounding box.

I suggest

Creating a Template (Part II, by John McGhie)
http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/Customizat...platePart2.htm

I spent a good deal of time on the MVP sites over the past two weeks,
especially on the template how-tos. What an incredible resource. I would
be in deep trouble without the information I gleaned from those pages. I
am blown away by the generosity of the MVPs on the MS sites. You folks
are amazing.

I have access to Postscript printers, but the fact that EMF can be
printed on non-postscript machines is attractive. I also don't mind
being able to see the mage without printing it first. I used LaTeX for
my undergrad thesis (and I still love the program) so I have many fond
memories of EPS files. However, my workplace uses Word, so I do as well.

Thank you again for your help. It looks like either way will be acceptable.

Take care,

Tom



Robert M. Franz wrote:
Hi Thomas

Thomas Campitelli wrote:

I am writing a longish report that will contain approximately 50
figures and several tables. The 50 figures will be maps made in
ArcView GIS software. I can export those maps as EPS or EMF files and
to my eye, they both look very good when printed from within Word. The
maps have an aerial photo background with various vector and text data
mixed in. Both the EPS and EMF files are roughly the same size (+/- 10%).


Do the EPS contain prefiew images? Does Word (which version) display the
previews or the originals (zoom in and you'll know).


So, of those two formats, what would you recommend for inclusion as
linked images in a Word Document?


I'm kind of unbiased there. EPS would have been my choice a couple of
years ago, but only if working with PS printer drivers exclusively (best
bet for not messing up the pictures at output time). I've worked with
linked WMF (slide-wise exported from PowerPoint) at times, and found it
OK, too. The chance for Word to tear anything apart in an EPS seems
still smaller compared to WMF/EMF.


Other potentially useful info: My report will have 50 to 60 pages of
text, and each image will occupy a single page. Let's say this thing
will be approximately 120 pages in total. Are 50 images anything to
worry about?


Linked, then certainly not. And if anything goes havoc (read: "red
cross" etc.), you can always re-insert a link.

I suggest

Creating a Template (Part II, by John McGhie)
http://word.mvps.org/FAQs/Customizat...platePart2.htm

for your bedtime reader, and there are a ton of other useful articles on
the mvp site, of course.

2cents
Robert

If you can publish it as a PDF, then EPS might be more tempting.
I don't think Word 2000 can print EPS files to non-PS printers, except
by sending the preview image.
Since the PDF process uses a PS output, the EPS files work fine. IF
people must print the Word file from wherever, you'd better use the EMF
format, or TIF, or something other than EPS.
Cheers
Jay

Apparently, _jay_, on 21/01/05 20:24,typed:
If you can publish it as a PDF, then EPS might be more tempting.
I don't think Word 2000 can print EPS files to non-PS printers, except
by sending the preview image.
Since the PDF process uses a PS output, the EPS files work fine. IF
people must print the Word file from wherever, you'd better use the EMF
format, or TIF, or something other than EPS.
Cheers
Jay



Would using EPS be better in the situations where a Word document (e.g.
a technical paper or a report or a thesis) is always printed to a PS
file using a PS printer?

I follow this practice since there is no certainity if the same document
will print on others's printers as it exactly prints on mine whereas a
PS file will print the same no matter what printer is used. And the
resulting PS file can be easily converted to a PDF. (Now, if I did
invest and install the expensive Adobe Acrobat, it would be a different
story.)

Sam.
--
Please remove the underscores ( the '_' symbols) from my email address
to obtain the correct one. Apologies, but the fudging is to remove spam.

As far as I am concerned, EPS would be fine. The EPS files save me a few
hundred KB on each image and I am comfortable with them. However, I
would like to avoid the situation where someone else in my office opens
the word document and cannot figure out what is going on. PDFs render
the entire question moot. I want to do whaterever will make Word the
happiest and pose the fewest possible problems for others in the future.
Training peopel to use Word is probably the best answer.

Thank you all for your responses.

Tom


Apparently, _jay_, on 21/01/05 20:24,typed:

If you can publish it as a PDF, then EPS might be more tempting.
I don't think Word 2000 can print EPS files to non-PS printers, except
by sending the preview image.
Since the PDF process uses a PS output, the EPS files work fine. IF
people must print the Word file from wherever, you'd better use the EMF
format, or TIF, or something other than EPS.
Cheers
Jay



Would using EPS be better in the situations where a Word document (e.g.
a technical paper or a report or a thesis) is always printed to a PS
file using a PS printer?

I follow this practice since there is no certainity if the same document
will print on others's printers as it exactly prints on mine whereas a
PS file will print the same no matter what printer is used. And the
resulting PS file can be easily converted to a PDF. (Now, if I did
invest and install the expensive Adobe Acrobat, it would be a different
story.)

Sam.

Check out pdfFactory Pro. It is under 1/3 the cost of Acrobat, and is much
faster.

The only way you can ensure that documents look the same is by sending them
as PDF.

Larry Randall
Word Expert

"Thomas Campitelli" wrote:

As far as I am concerned, EPS would be fine. The EPS files save me a few
hundred KB on each image and I am comfortable with them. However, I
would like to avoid the situation where someone else in my office opens
the word document and cannot figure out what is going on. PDFs render
the entire question moot. I want to do whaterever will make Word the
happiest and pose the fewest possible problems for others in the future.
Training peopel to use Word is probably the best answer.

Thank you all for your responses.

Tom


Apparently, _jay_, on 21/01/05 20:24,typed:

If you can publish it as a PDF, then EPS might be more tempting.
I don't think Word 2000 can print EPS files to non-PS printers, except
by sending the preview image.
Since the PDF process uses a PS output, the EPS files work fine. IF
people must print the Word file from wherever, you'd better use the EMF
format, or TIF, or something other than EPS.
Cheers
Jay



Would using EPS be better in the situations where a Word document (e.g.
a technical paper or a report or a thesis) is always printed to a PS
file using a PS printer?

I follow this practice since there is no certainity if the same document
will print on others's printers as it exactly prints on mine whereas a
PS file will print the same no matter what printer is used. And the
resulting PS file can be easily converted to a PDF. (Now, if I did
invest and install the expensive Adobe Acrobat, it would be a different
story.)

Sam.

Apparently, _LarryranTX_, on 25/01/05 16:17,typed:
Check out pdfFactory Pro. It is under 1/3 the cost of Acrobat, and is much
faster.

The only way you can ensure that documents look the same is by sending them
as PDF.

Larry Randall
Word Expert


True, PDF is the way to go. Another method making a PDF file:
1) install a default PS printer.
2) Print to the PS printer as a file. Rename the resulting .prn file to
..ps file.
3) Then convert it to PDF using many freely available programs one being
GNU Ghostscript (http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/index.html).

regards,
Sam.



--
Please remove the underscores ( the '_' symbols) from my email address
to obtain the correct one. Apologies, but the fudging is to remove spam.

one last trivia point-
when saving the print file to disk, if you set file type to "any", you
can then give it a ".ps" extension directly.

cheers
Jay