[darcyrmt]

Using my old version of Word, I would generate Word docs (.doc) with about 12
scans on a page, saving it used about 60-70 MB of hard drive space each.
Using the same file but re-saving it under the new Word 2007 format (.docx),
the same page uses only 2 MB. Considering each one of the .jpgs is at least
4-6 MB each, does the new Word 2007 use some super compression technique? I
don't want save the new documents under the old system because of hard drive
space, but I don't want to risk the new documents as .docx not having all the
information..

[Robert M. Franz (RMF)]

Hi Darcy

darcyrmt wrote:
Using my old version of Word, I would generate Word docs (.doc) with about 12
scans on a page, saving it used about 60-70 MB of hard drive space each.
Using the same file but re-saving it under the new Word 2007 format (.docx),
the same page uses only 2 MB. Considering each one of the .jpgs is at least
4-6 MB each, does the new Word 2007 use some super compression technique? I
don't want save the new documents under the old system because of hard drive
space, but I don't want to risk the new documents as .docx not having all the
information..

All I know about the new 2007 file format is that, well, it's entirely
different than the old (97€“2003). Yes, it probably is superior, but
whether it's _that_ much better ... ;-)

OTOH, if your document is comprised entirely by scans €“ it's a good
question why you put these into a DOC wrapper in the first place. Wrap
it in PDF if you must, or leave it in good resolution TIFFs. I can't see
what the DOC format would serve except adding overhead and, ultimately,
(more) danger of legacy problems.

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