Topic: Working with PDF

[BillB]

Question from a client's client:

Do you know if your scanner allows scan to PDF versus scan to Word?
Maybe you prefer to have your scans as Word but I’ve always found Adobe has more functionality.

We could argue personal preference, but a scan is just a picture and either Word or PDF are just containers to collect multiple scans and allow you to print them in a logical manner.

I like Word because you can manipulate the image in a program you already own and are familiar with. I can readily size and annotate my scans as well as combine them with other documentation such as a cover letter or contract in a single editable file. If I decide one scan belongs with another document, I just copy it over.

To do this in a PDF, you need Adobe Acrobat ($450) or an imitation program ($50 and up) and then need to learn how to use it.

Resources:
Adobe Acrobat(R) - http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobatpro/
PDFCreator - an open source project - http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/
PDFCreate4 - some functions of Acrobat, some functions not in Acrobat - http://www.nuance.com/pdfconverter/

This is just a sampling. There are many more programs that create PDFs; but not so many that allow you to manipulate already created PDFs.

In fact, many programs format their output as a PDF. This is usually database-type software such as tax programs that don't actually have a document interface. Office 2007 has a similar capability which I have not experimented with yet.

[dewey]

Scanning files directly into Word can cause problems.  IIANM, Word converts the scanned file to a BMP image.  This image can lose resolution, making the image difficult to read, enlarge or print.

It also depends on the final use of the scanned document.  If it is scanned for archive use, putting it in a program you know will always be available and readable is paramount.  Word may not be the best option, especially if, five versions from now, support/backward-compatibility with your current version goes away.  Same thing applies to Abobe Acrobat/PDF format; a newer version may break your current files.

Our office scanner will save files as PDF or TIFF.  TIFF was developed for document management and in some ways is better than PDF.  It is readable in most graphic viewing software, which means there is a large base of programs (not just one or two) that can read the files.  The format is now under the control of Adobe.

If the file is to be used on a web site or sent to others, PDF format is probably the best due to the proliferation and freely available Acrobat Reader software.  The software easily embeds into any(?) browser and is available, for free, for Windows(Vista/XP/2K/95/), Mac/Apple and all(?) versions of Linux.  You can never guarantee that someone has access to Word, but everyone has or can get software to read a PDF file.

Dewey Williams

[BillB]

I agree in the quest for archival standards that TIFF (or JPG) has the best chance of standing the test of time and PDF probably has the broadest likelihood of arriving at a consumer's eyeballs or printer in a usable format. However, my response was in the context of the query.

The goal is to transmit the content of a physical document by email with the available resources. The client's scanner software barely works with her version of Windows so the most reliable input option was to use the TWAIN driver with the program she was most familiar with. Since this document might have a life of a few weeks and we know her correspondent can handle the Word file, that was my recommendation.

I did a quick experiment with a typical office document. The original was mostly type with a simple color logo. I scanned an 8-1/2x11 in color at 300 DPI - representative default settings. While the Word image was noticeably slightly fuzzier at 500% enlargement, the option is in the KB:

• Uncompressed TIFF - 24,667
• JPG - 1,235
• Word - 778.

(I don't have the software to create a PDF.)

I don't dispute anything Dewey says. For a different user with a different original and goal I might make different suggestions. For my purposes here, my original opinion stands. A TIFF is not natively printable and a PDF is not easily annotated or amended. The Word 97/2000/2003 format will be widely readable for another 5-10 years.

I would never consider scanning printed photos directly into Word. While the quality may be good within Word, I have never succeeded in extracting a decent image out of Office. It obviously does not just embed a standard image format but somehow incorporates it into the Office system.

[BillB]

The Word 97/2000/2003 format will be widely readable for another 5-10 years.

So much for what I know. The rumor is that Microsoft Office 2007 SP1 breaks access to Office 97 files. In fact, the documentation I can find [http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/01/137257] implies that versions older than Office 97 have been disabled because they pose an excessive security risk.

Although it's still foggy, the more definitive information at http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938810/en-us refers to the Office 2003 Service Pack 3 (released fall 2007). Presumably, the same restriction is in the Office 2007 SP 1 (released April 2008).

It's also exciting to learn that Office service packs cannot be uninstalled -- you have to completely uninstall and reinstall the entire Office package to roll back an SP. The Microsoft KB does offer a hack to read the older files. Or, my guess is that a lot of Office clones will still read them. You could also download an old-version Office viewer that's distributed for people who don't own MS Office.

All trademarks or other third-party sources referenced are the property of their owner(s).

[dewey]

Will not WordPad read Office Word files?  Although it probably kills any special formatting, a file would at least be readable.

I have numerous OLD files at work; I may put this to the test Monday.

Dewey

[BillB]

Good idea, Dewey.

I think the WordPad default format is either RTF or Word 6.0 - one of the blocked formats. There would be no reason to patch this access to old formats since WordPad can't run macros which would be the security risk.

[dewey]

I had no trouble opening Word 6 and Word 97 files in Office 2007.  The Word 2.0 files opened, and were for the most part readable, except that there was some "unknown symbols and binary stuff" in the header and footer.  My files used no fancy formatting, and I can't say if  ANY formatting was preserved in Word 07.