Replies

Good idea, thanks

Good idea, thanks

“If the field is in the header/footer, it will update anyway.”

This is the bit that I was missing. Where is it documented?

“If the field is in the header/footer, it will update anyway.”

This is the bit that I was missing. Where is it documented?

What’s more, the original document had 110 IMBED fields, which produced 124 picture files.

What’s more, the original document had 110 IMBED fields, which produced 124 picture files.

That’s what I planned to do to.

I “expected”, that having saved it as HTM and then converted back to doc, the pictures would still be small.

There are 125 pictures there, so it is no mean feat to change them all manually.

So I thought I’d write a script to do it.

Now here’s the rub, somehow, although they are all PBrush objects, word knows that 2 of them are the same image, so I end up with 2 fields with the same value.

Seems that any way that I try this, I am stumped.

That’s what I planned to do to.

I “expected”, that having saved it as HTM and then converted back to doc, the pictures would still be small.

There are 125 pictures there, so it is no mean feat to change them all manually.

So I thought I’d write a script to do it.

Now here’s the rub, somehow, although they are all PBrush objects, word knows that 2 of them are the same image, so I end up with 2 fields with the same value.

Seems that any way that I try this, I am stumped.

Interesting…

I tried saving as HTML and it did indeed reduce the size intensly and it saved all pictures as BOTH jpg and png. However, when I opened it up in Word and re-saved it as a DOC, it made all the pictures PBrush again and ended up at the original size.

If I save it as HTML filtered and then convert back, it stays small.

Now…

The picture quality in the former (HTML) after conversion back to a doc looks as good as the original, whilst the quality of the latter (HTML Filtered) is much worse.

So…

whilst the png files appear to be of good quality and small, the HTML Filtered conversion only uses the inferior jpg format and if I convert the former back to a doc, it ramps the size right back up again.

This is wierd.

Interesting…

I tried saving as HTML and it did indeed reduce the size intensly and it saved all pictures as BOTH jpg and png. However, when I opened it up in Word and re-saved it as a DOC, it made all the pictures PBrush again and ended up at the original size.

If I save it as HTML filtered and then convert back, it stays small.

Now…

The picture quality in the former (HTML) after conversion back to a doc looks as good as the original, whilst the quality of the latter (HTML Filtered) is much worse.

So…

whilst the png files appear to be of good quality and small, the HTML Filtered conversion only uses the inferior jpg format and if I convert the former back to a doc, it ramps the size right back up again.

This is wierd.

Wow, that easy huh!

Thanks macropod.

Can I make this the default behaviour, or do I need to go through that procedure every time I add a new section?

Wow, that easy huh!

Thanks macropod.

Can I make this the default behaviour, or do I need to go through that procedure every time I add a new section?

No they word docs.

The pictures show as {EMBED PBrush}.

Now, the doc from which I was copying the picture is 94Mb, although it ZIPs up to 3Mb. What a waste of space! You’d think someone could come up with a file format that’d optimise the space.

Now I guess that 94Mb is fairly resource hungry. A reboot seems to have sorted it.

No they word docs.

The pictures show as {EMBED PBrush}.

Now, the doc from which I was copying the picture is 94Mb, although it ZIPs up to 3Mb. What a waste of space! You’d think someone could come up with a file format that’d optimise the space.

Now I guess that 94Mb is fairly resource hungry. A reboot seems to have sorted it.

Two questions:

1) What is intellisense?

2) Is it possible to define named arguments for a UDF?