Yes, this is our practice also.
We use Autocad and SolidWorks drawings in our publications. But those tools
tend to make crappy images in raster formats (PNG, JPG). But recently we
started storing these images in PDF and using the FOP plug-in to use these
images in our PDF rendering. The output looks much better.
We also use as much SVG as possible. The only drawback is usually fonts of
text in these images may be rendered differently, depending on the renderer. An
example of this is when a drawing tool puts out an SVG and different tool picks
it up, the fonts are "approximated" sometimes. So SVG is not always the silver
bullet for us, but its really great on simple drawing images.
In a message dated 8/6/2009 3:34:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
Aug 6, 2009 at 10:10 AM, <DeanNelson@aol.com> wrote:
> It really
depends on the content of your images.
O'Reilly, we store a "web" and "print" version of every single
appears in our content. The "print" version is fairly easy:
a black &
white PDF at 300dpi. The "web" version is more complex, and
itself suitable for the web. Instead, it is a file that
can be transformed
into an image suitable for the web (changes size
For technical illustrations, SVG is an attractive choice
for a format,
but we currently don't have any expertise in storing &
these, so we haven't. Instead, we use a mix of PNGs
illustrations, drawings) and JPGs (for photos), both stored at
big sizes and in full color (when available). When it comes time
actually deliver content, we use these PNG or JPG masters to make
smaller (less than 1000 pixels high or wide, say) versions that
actually deliver to customers.
Speaking very generically, JPGs
_tend_ to be better at photographs and
PNGs _tend_ to be better at the
rest, but that can bite you. Use SVG
if you can also _tends_ to be good
advice, but SVG has real ramp-up
costs. PDF is great for sending things to
unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
additional commands, e-mail: