Size of executables are different

[Guest]

When I am compiling the same project with .jpg file, the resulting .chm is double the size of the .chm compiled .bmp file. Is it alright? The size of the .jpg is less than the size of the .bmp file.

Also, I am planning to change the .chm to .htm later through SSL. In that case, it OK to keep the .bmp files?

[RoboColum_n_]

Hi meenakshmi. I have to say that's not my experience. It may all depend on the settings you have used to create the JPG and BMP files though. Try experiementing with the resolution and see if that makes a difference. Are you sure it is the new image format that is causing the increase in size? Could you have added anything else?

[CharlotteNJ11]

Hi Colum,

I work with Meenakshmi. I had the same problem with a project I converted to .chm. So to test, I created a new, plain HTML help project that contained only one topic with a .bmp graphic and compiled. I then replaced the .bmp with a .jpg and compiled. The results were as follows:

graphic1.bmp image size = 457kb compiled .chm size = 47kb
graphic1.jpg image size = 87kb compile .chm size= 81kb

I tried saving the .jpg with a lower resolution, played around with the settings, etc. and was able to decrease the .chm size a little but it was still larger than the .bmp generated .chm.

Any ideas? Thanks,
Charlotte

[RoboColum_n_]

Hi Charlotte. I tried exactly the same as you and don't get the same results. I actually created two new projects with a single topic in each. In one added the JPG and the other the BMP. The results were

graphic1.bmp image size = 771kb compiled .chm size = 658kb
graphic1.jpg image size = 47kb compile .chm size= 87kb

I then swapped the two files around and compiled and guess what? The CHM file sizes were just swapped around but exactly the same! The one thing that screams out to me is the difference in the size of your BMP compiled file. Can you tell me what resolutions you used for both the original versions of the BMP and JPG files and I'll perform another test.

BTW I'm assuming you have checked the "Optimise CHM FIle Size" option on the single source layout properties?

[Guest]

Hi Colum,

I always had the "Optimise CHM FIle Size" option checked on the single source layout properties.

Meenakshmi

[RoboColum_n_]

Hi Meenakshmi. Good that you have the optimise setting checked. I thought of something else that may help us get to the bottom of your issue. Where were the BMP and JPG images sourced from (e.g. screen grabs, PSP, Word, etc.). Also what did you use to convert your image from BMP to JPG? If you or Charlotte could let me know this and also the resolutions used I will be able to help further.

[CharlotteNJ11]

Hi Colum,

The BMP and JPG are sourced from screen shots. Most of us use Snag-it to capture the images. I also use PSP (simply Print Scrn & paste into PSP). When I view the image properties in PSP, regardless of the method used, the resolution defaults at 72PPI. I tried playing around with the .jpg's resolution. It made a bit of a difference with the size of the .chm but not enough to say we've solved the problem - also, each time I messed with the resolution, I wasn't happy with the quality.

For the test, I used PSP to convert the .jpg but I believe in Meenaksmi's case, the BMPs were automatically changed to .jpg when she converted the.hlp project to .chm. Both the brand new project and the converted project resulted in large .chm sizes.

Any ideas? Thanks,
Charlotte

[RoboColum_n_]

Hi Charlotte. Try this link which is full of useful tips about screen captures, resizing, etc. Personally though I highly recommend a professional screen capture tool (e.g. Snagit) rather than cutting & pasting. Most are relatively cheap and are worth their weight in gold.

[Peter Grainge]

You may also find this useful. Click here.