View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0002277ScribusPDFpublic2016-04-02 18:07
Reportertimi Assigned To 
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
Status newResolutionopen 
PlatformanyOSanyOS Versionany
Product Version1.3 
Summary0002277: Image compression in PDF
DescriptionDialog "Save as PDF" / register "General":

The UI concerning the image compression is a little bit unclear. The word "compression" isn't visible directly. Maybe it would be clearer doing this:

- Replace "Method:" by "Compression method:". Add in the tooltip "(loosless)" for ZIP-compression.

- Replace "Quality:" by "Quality of JPEG compression:" When "None" is selected as copression method, this label and combo box should be diabled.
Tagsdiscussion
PatchNo

Relationships

has duplicate 0002486 closed Change meaning of "Quality" in PDF Export 
related to 0003696 closedplinnell Tooltip PDF-Export / General / Compression Method: Remove confusing info from tooltip 
related to 0003697 closedcbradney PDF-Export / General / GroupBox "Image Compression method" 
related to 0001554 acknowledged PDF Creation - image downsampling philosophy 
child of 0002932 acknowledged Metabug: PDF Enhancements 

Activities

timi

2005-07-22 15:41

reporter   ~0005658

Furthermore, the tooltip of the combo box shows "Compression levels: ...". But this isn't compression level but the opposite: the quality level!

mhanski

2006-04-22 16:07

developer   ~0010316

Some suggestions copied from the duplicate 2486:

Howard White:
In PDF Export, the "quality" option determines the amount of compression applied in certain instances. The tooltip correctly reports that "high" quality == maximum compression. The user who does not read tooltips could be forgiven for thinking that "high" means best quality, i.e. mimimal compression.

This meaning of quality appeared in earliest versions of Acrobat Distiller, but was changed a long time ago by Adobe. Perhaps the option also ought to be labelled "Image Quality."

mhanski:
In scribus 1.3.3, it says "Compression quality" and not "Quality". However, you are right, "Compression quality==maximum" can be easily misunderstood. I think, the label "Compression level" would be more appriopriate.

timi

2006-04-24 10:14

reporter   ~0010392

Some parts of this issue are yet solved, others lack. So I try a little summary of what is to do, talking about 1.3.3.1.

>> The UI concerning the image compression is a little bit
>> unclear. The word "compression" isn't visible directly.
>> Maybe it would be clearer doing this:
>>
>> - Replace "Method:" by "Compression method:". Add in
>> the tooltip "(loosless)" for ZIP-compression.

This is done yet.
 
What stays is the problem with "Compression quality". This label itself is a contradiction: high compression = little file size. High quality = big file size.

>> The tooltip correctly reports that "high" quality
>> == maximum compression. The user who does not read
>> tooltips could be forgiven for thinking that "high"
>> means best quality, i.e. mimimal compression.

"High" actually really yet means hight quality! (PDFs made with "high" are much bigger than PDFs made with "low") The question is if we want to ask for "compression level" or for "quality level" (how we do actually).

>> This meaning of quality appeared in earliest versions
>> of Acrobat Distiller, but was changed a long time ago
>> by Adobe. Perhaps the option also ought to be labelled
>> "Image Quality."

Am I right assuming that you prefer asking for "quality level"?

So I propose to do the following changes:

1. Change label "Compression &Quality:" to "Image &Quality Level:"

2. Change the following in the tooltip of the combobox:
   "Compression quality level for loosy compression methods:" to
   "Image quality level for loosy compression methods:";
   "Note that a quality level does" to
   "Note that an image quality level does";
   "at any given quality level." to
   "at any given image quality level.".

3. The label "Image &Quality Level:" and the combobox should
   be disabled when "None" or "Lossless - Zip" are choosen
   as Compression Method. (In this cases, the image quality
   level has no effect, and this should be reflected in the
   UI)

With this three points, this issue and the request from issue 0002486 should be resolved.

timi

2006-04-25 10:03

reporter   ~0010450

The string "Image Quality level" is quite long. In my proposel I used it because "level" was already present in the existing strings. But perhaps it would be better to use only "Image Quality": shorter and easier:

 1. Change label "Compression &Quality:" to "Image &Quality:"
 
 2. Change the following in the tooltip of the combobox:
    "Compression quality level for loosy compression methods:" to
    "Image quality for loosy compression methods:";
    "Note that a quality level does" to
    "Note that the image quality does";
    "at any given quality level." to
    "at any given image quality.".
 
 3. The label "Image &Quality:" and the combobox should
    be disabled when "None" or "Lossless - Zip" are choosen
    as Compression Method. (In this cases, the image quality
    has no effect, and this should be reflected in the
    UI)

Kunda

2016-04-01 12:48

updater   ~0039674

What stays is the problem with "Compression quality". This label itself is a contradiction: high compression = little file size. High quality = big file size.

>> The tooltip correctly reports that "high" quality
>> == maximum compression. The user who does not read
>> tooltips could be forgiven for thinking that "high"
>> means best quality, i.e. mimimal compression.

"High" actually really yet means hight quality! (PDFs made with "high" are much bigger than PDFs made with "low") The question is if we want to ask for "compression level" or for "quality level" (how we do actually).

Maybe a way to illustrate this better to to the user who hasn't read the tooltip and maybe mistaken by Compression Quality != High Quality
is to add another combobox called "Image Quality" that is dependent (and also can affect) the 'Compression Quality' combobox. So for example, if the user chooses Maximum Compression then it reflects immediately in the Image Quality combobox.

Or perhapse instead of comboxboxes we move to sliders and have one slider's movement effect the other... raise the compression slider and the quality slider degrades.

timi

2016-04-02 18:07

reporter   ~0039722

I like the idea with the sliders.

Nevertheless personally I would still prefer what was proposed at https://bugs.scribus.net/view.php?id=2277#c10450

Reasons:

1.) It requieres less coding that additional combo boxes or sliders. It’s just some minor string changes and one enhancement to graying out a widget. Given that this issue is open since 2005, maybe the easiest solution is the best one.

2.) It’s the same way InDesing does.

3.) For image objects, at Properties ? Image ? PDF?Compression you find two similar combo boxes (“Method” and “Quality”) with the same entries and one additional entry (“Global”). I think that these settings should stay similiar to the PDF export dialog, and that’s easier when using combo boxes.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2005-07-22 15:32 timi New Issue
2005-07-22 15:41 timi Note Added: 0005658
2005-12-22 23:00 plinnell Relationship added child of 0002932
2005-12-22 23:00 plinnell Status new => acknowledged
2006-04-22 09:07 mhanski Relationship added related to 0002486
2006-04-22 16:05 mhanski Relationship deleted related to 0002486
2006-04-22 16:05 mhanski Relationship added has duplicate 0002486
2006-04-22 16:07 mhanski Note Added: 0010316
2006-04-22 16:09 mhanski OS => any
2006-04-22 16:09 mhanski OS Version => any
2006-04-22 16:09 mhanski Platform => any
2006-04-22 16:09 mhanski Product Version 1.3.0 => 1.3
2006-04-24 10:14 timi Note Added: 0010392
2006-04-24 10:37 mhanski Relationship added related to 0003696
2006-04-24 10:57 mhanski Relationship added related to 0003697
2006-04-25 10:03 timi Note Added: 0010450
2016-03-30 22:36 Kunda Relationship added related to 0001554
2016-03-30 22:37 Kunda Patch => No
2016-03-30 22:37 Kunda Category Usability => PDF
2016-04-01 12:48 Kunda Note Added: 0039674
2016-04-01 12:48 Kunda Tag Attached: discussion
2016-04-01 12:56 Kunda Status acknowledged => feedback
2016-04-02 18:07 timi Note Added: 0039722
2016-04-02 18:07 timi Status feedback => new