<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="bbPress" -->

<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>

<channel>
<title>doPDF Forum Topic: File size</title>
<link>http://www.dopdf.com/forum/</link>
<description>Discussion forum for doPDF users.</description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:43:53 +0000</pubDate>

<item>
<title>Softland on "File size"</title>
<link>http://www.dopdf.com/forum/topic/file-size#post-871</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Softland</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">871@http://www.dopdf.com/forum/</guid>
<description>&#60;p&#62;Make sure you uncheck the option &#34;Embed fonts&#34; when printing. I printed with dopdf google.com's main page and it resulted a bit over 80kb, the same test with fonts embedded being at over 1Mb. &#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;The 300dpi option is ignored by Internet Explorer, if you do the test of setting a 72dpi option in word or notepad you'll see is kept. IE ignores it because it already sends the images in lower resolution.
&#60;/p&#62;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Acerola on "File size"</title>
<link>http://www.dopdf.com/forum/topic/file-size#post-870</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:33:27 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Acerola</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">870@http://www.dopdf.com/forum/</guid>
<description>&#60;p&#62;As a suggestion for future releases, you should try and improve the image compression algorithms. I did a simple test. I opened Google's main page on Internet Explorer and printed it on dopdf, pdf995 and pdffactory. The results were:&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;pdffactory: 24KB&#60;br /&#62;
pdf995: 30KB&#60;br /&#62;
dopdf: 489KB&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;All at 300dpi, which I couldn't change in dopdf, but this bug has already been reported on other messages in this forum.
&#60;/p&#62;</description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

