MathGroup Archive 2009

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: New Wolfram Tutorial Collection documentation is

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg99347] Re: [mg99310] Re: New Wolfram Tutorial Collection documentation is
  • From: George Woodrow III <georgevw3 at>
  • Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 05:23:03 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <gtbunt$2qn$> <gtef3u$145$>

With Preview (Mac OS X), you can do a Save As... with any given PDF.

When the dialog box shows up, select "Reduce File Size" from the  
Quartz Filter Pop up menu, and the file will be saved in reduced size.  
The file I tested this with went from 20.1 MBytes to 5.1, a pretty  
good reduction. The file "Visualization and Graphics" went from 138  
Mbytes to 8.7 Mbytes. Not quite as good as Acrobat, but probably close  

The meta data indicates that the original file was generated using OS X.

Just as an aside, when I save a regular notebook as PDF, the file size  
is rather large. When it matters, I use the "Reduce File Size" option  
when saving PDFs on my Mac. It is possible that there is something in  
the Notebooks that makes large PDF files.

I think that Wolfram could go through the extra step to make smaller  
PDF files without much difficulty. I don't see that it affects the  
quality of the output for either screen or print.

george woodrow

On May 2, 2009, at 6:00 AM, Thomas Muench wrote:

> Dear Bob,
> it gets even better: There is also an option "Reduce size" in Acrobat.
> That reduces the size of the "Visualizatio and Graphics" to under
> 4MB!!!!. What happens there is that the graphics become downsamples
> and less crisp. That is visible upon printout, but not disturbingly so
> if you don't compare it directly to the original. For on-screen
> viewing it is perfectly fine. So, if Wolfram would maybe offer 2
> options for pdf download - low quality (for screen) and high quality
> (for printout) - that would even be more user friendly.
> Best, thomas
> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Bob F <deepyogurt at> wrote:
>> On May 1, 3:24 am, Thomas M=FCnch <thomas.mue... at> wrote:
>>> I downloaded all of the PDFs, and it took a very long time, even  
>>> on my
>>> fast connection at work. My guess is that Wolfram gives these
>>> downloads less bandwidth compared to, for example, downloading
>>> software, or the curated data. But I would say that's all right.
>>> The largest of the files is "Visualization and graphics", which  
>>> comes
>>> at almost 140MB. I opened it in Acrobat (Professional version), and
>>> simply out of curiosity removed all the Metadata and hidden
>>> information in the pdf (You can do this under the Menu item  
>>> "Document> E=
> xamine Document...", at least under Windows). After doing this, and
>>> saving the file, the size was reduced to less than 30 MB, just a bit
>>> over one fifth of the original! On first visual inspection, the two
>>> versions appear to be identical.
>>> This particular file contains lots of graphics, so the reduction in
>>> size might not be as large in other files, I didn't try. But  
>>> anyways,
>>> this begs the question: did I remove ANY functionality by doing  
>>> this?
>>> If not, it would be much nicer if Wolfram could place PDFs of  
>>> reduced
>>> size for download on their website.
>>> thomas
>> I tried what you did for all the files and the total size for all 23
>> files dropped from about 362 MB to about 188 MB, so this amounts to
>> about a 50% decrease in file size. Seems like quite a lot of  
>> overhead.
>> Wonder what all this extra stuff was???
>> -Bob

  • Prev by Date: Re: New Wolfram Tutorial Collection documentation is ready
  • Next by Date: Re: Re: New Wolfram Tutorial Collection documentation is ready
  • Previous by thread: possible bug in symbolic sum of a trig series
  • Next by thread: disabling a menuitem within a ActionMenu or other menus