Cosmo,
Haven't tried it at home on my mac laptop, but for my work machine, there was a slight difference for the adventure vs. several of the articles (3 seconds as opposed to 1 second).
However, it definitely seemed to be in the rendering more than the opening. For example, the PDFs with a large image like the Credit-TOC and Covers took almost as long as the adventure to open. However, most of the others even those close to the same file size opened and rendered faster.
FYI - I am using Acrobat Reader 7 under Win XP. The PC is also pimped out (3.4 GHz dual, 2 GB RAM), but I'm running plenty of other meaty apps so it balances out a bit.
Tonight I'll also try my mac laptop under Preview and Reader, and if I can get it to run, my archaic Dell laptop, but it hasn't successfully booted in a while (hence the shiny new mac). So we'll see.
Multiple PDFs feels a bit... unprofessional, to be honest. Especially considering the otherwise über-quality.
Really, a 25MB PDF is nothing nowadays. I could easily open several PDFs of that size even on my old Mac laptop. So, I would definitely prefer a single PDF version.
If providing single PDF only is out of the question, could you provide both the multiple PDF version and the single PDF version for downloading in the future, please? That way everybody can download their preferred version.
I have to say that I did like the multiple files for purposes of segregating player vs. GM content.
My son who runs our game said just don't read the module or the section of Thassilon, because it gives out clues about the storyline. This made it easy for me to keep from accidentally reading stuff I shouldn't know.
But if they do combine the sections into one larger file, bookmarks would be a neccessity.
Overall, I was very happy with the product..
Let's see the same sort of quality with next month's edition.
- Sorny
Puting in my vote for one file. This is because when I run a game I will have several PDFs open and it is eazier for me to keep track of what file is where if I don't have to have more files open.
For those that like the multiple PDFs because you can have several things open. Keep in mind that in Adobe Reader. If you click on window and slect new window you can then have several versions of the same file open.
rogue
|
the multiple files kinda surprised me but for all intent purposes, didn't bother me, other then I'd like to see them in the way they are in the book (obviously I can see the pages numbers, but it would be nice). Then again not gonna use the pdf as a "book" per se anyways as I'm running a online pbp game.
bookmarks, ehhh right now if they are there, then great, if not then ehhh oh well
edited & copied out of the pdf fine (showed a friend rule #10 regarding goblins by copy & paste into Yahoo & then tried a pic copy into Writer & everything was fine.
Yes Foxit Reader 2.0 is what I use ever since I read the article in Maximum PC, & haven't looked back + never cared for Acrobat.
glad to have it as part of my subscription, even enough to go after a Gamemastery module subscription as well soon.
RM
Chief Technical Officer
|
...add a link to non-adobe pdf reader options for those with slowdown issues.
Honestly, I do *not* recommend third-party PDF readers. The PDF format is so crazily complex that I have never seen a third-party app that can handle every PDF flawlessly. At some point, you'll run across a PDF that displays layers in the wrong order, or positions a text box in the wrong place, or something worse. Yes, some of those third-party apps are faster than old versions of Adobe Reader, but Adobe Reader 8 is—for the first time in like a decade of Reader releases—really speedy.
. . . half of the problem with massive PDF files clogging up your system is using bloated software like, say, Adobe Reader. It has an enormous system footprint which is very unnecessary.Adobe Reader had long been one of my least favorite pieces of software for this very reason, but Reader 8 actually delivered major improvements in this respect (and in many others), and has once again become my default PDF reader.
If you're using anything older than Reader 8, you should really take the time to download the new version. As always, it's free.
Thank you for the prompt, Vic! I just downloaded Adobe Reader v8.1 to replace v7, and >wow< files open 10 times faster and the interface is clearer and looks better!
|
|
after seeing Vic's post it reminded me of this
I downloaded the RLPG when it came online & had problems with the header text & such not displaying letters (P L DINS for example), but I was using a older version of Foxit Reader, a board member prompted me about updating it to 2.0 & I did & no problems what so ever after that.
Also I forgot to add as well, no difference in file size opening for me as well (Pentium D 2.8 Proc, XP media & 3.0 GB RAM,a Nvidia GeForce 6800 graphic card as well + even a DELL too, ha ha)
|
Honestly, I do *not* recommend third-party PDF readers. The PDF format is so crazily complex that I have never seen a third-party app that can handle every PDF flawlessly.
Even Adobe's Digital Editions software doesn't render Pathfinder correctly. The text in the colored bar at the top of the page looks right, but there is a black box covering the page background starting at the top left corner of the text, all the way to the right side of the page, and below the text the same height as the background color block.
It doesn't cover all the page elements, though; it is behind the top part of the Sandpoint devil's wing, and on odd-numbered pages it falls behind the color block on the right side of the page.
Pretty minor, but I thought it was interesting that this software doesn't render the page properly, where Acrobat Reader does.
Non-subscribers can purchase the PDF only after the product's retail release date—in the case of Pathfinder 1, that's August 29th. The price for the PDF will be $13.99.
Not for nothing but I have yet to receive my 1st subscription issue (though I think that's, in part, due to an ordering goof up I recently mentioned on the Customer Service board). Now that GenCon's over is everybody with a spare tongue licking stamps?
Keep telling us what you think—we're listening!
Well, not that I've seen the download yet but I'd vote for a single PDF file over multiples. I'd also like to see bookmarks, even if it's just the section headers (though detailed stuff like maps & monsters is more helpful). I've got Acrobat Pro 8 so I could just stick the bookmarks in myself...unless the files are protected from that. Anyone???
As for the speed of file openings, I've got a 200MB+ PDF of a scanned in book that opens with nary a pause (2GB of RAM makes everything so much faster.) Even on my slower and more prone to crashing rig opening files wasn't a time issue. On a slower rig, however, I've noticed Reader itself takes longer to open on it's initial load, I've heard that FoxIt (mentioned above) takes that problem right out of the equation (which I can believe as the file size for the program is a fraction of Adobe's Reader!) so I don't think, unless someone's running a homebrewed PDF reader on a TRS-80, that making the PDFs one file would clog things up much. Just my 2cp.
- Chris Shadowens
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Pretty minor, but I thought it was interesting that this software doesn't render the page properly, where Acrobat Reader does.
I've seen Reader 8 render files properly that Acrobat Pro 8 renders incorrectly. I suspect that Reader may be deliberately designed to be more forgiving of PDF weirdness than Adobe's authoring tools, which actually makes a lot of sense.
(Pathfinder PDFs, by the way, are generated from Adobe InDesign files using Adobe Acrobat Pro, so if that doesn't generate an Adobe-standard PDF, I can't imagine what does.)
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Even on my slower and more prone to crashing rig opening files wasn't a time issue.
It's not the opening that's going to be so bad—it's the scrolling around. Measure the time it takes you to scroll up or down five pages when you're working with a 50-page file versus an 8-page file.
The difference will probably be related more to the amount of RAM you have (and, in some configurations, video card performance) than processor speed. If you have 2GB RAM, I suspect you'll have a much better experience with large files than somebody with 512 MB.
I actually prefer the multiple files. For instance, I can open just the bestiary if I want.
If you do intend to start combining them into one file though, bookmarks would help.
Like many I'm still waiting on the Pathfinder PDF, but I can vouch for the pain of opening a large PDF file as opposed to a smaller one. I've been using Adobe Reader 7 on my main machine (though this thread has niggled me into trying out Foxit Reader 2.0) and I can read a full page of text faster than it renders from a large file. Foxit Reader seems to be a fair bit faster, but it's also buggy on the display settings. If I set it to view just one page on screen, then I expect it to show one page, and not slip off the edges as I page down. It also seems to depend a lot on the computer - on my backup machine it displays scanned image books extremely badly, to the point of illegibility, though it displays the same file fine on my main computer.
FWIW, the main machine is a P4 1.5GHz machine with 1.5 Gig of RAM running WinXP, while the backup is a P3 667MHz machine with 384 Meg of Ram and no video card running Win98.
And IMO Bookmarks should be included - it's much easier to find things using them. I'm inclined to add them to unlocked PDFs I purchase if they don't have them for ease of use.
(Pathfinder PDFs, by the way, are generated from Adobe InDesign files using Adobe Acrobat Pro, so if that doesn't generate an Adobe-standard PDF, I can't imagine what does.)
I have to tell you, Vic, that in my experience (and it has been the same publishing from any Adobe software or Quark to PDF), that I get a MUCH more manageable file by printing to file using a PostScript printer driver and then manually distilling the generated PostScript with custom settings. I can't mess with this one to show you the results (and I wouldn't feel ethical trying to strip the security), but I am confident a single file for this entire product should work just fine (I have done with magazines and books that contain many illustrations and graphics).
If you want more info on this shoot me an email privately (you should have access to that as part of the boards).
Sean Mahoney
|
|
Cosmo No change in performance with any of the 10 files.
For the big vs many pdf's
If I have 1 pdf that isn't protected I can extract the pages I want and have those open when I have a need for them. If it's protected, I can't do that. 1 pdf file is better than 10.I think the DRM is a pain and kind of insulting to me, the customer. There are things I like to do with my pdf's but can't if they are password protected. I'm not a pirate and I don't like being treated as such. I know the security features are used in business, but it ain't cool to tick off your customer.
I still like the pdf and it looks cool and it's neato keen. Thanks for hooking us up with it.
I'll make due with the protections and multiple pdf's. (but I shouldn't have too do that.)seacrest out.
ps. The art rocks!
Sorry, but unfortunately this is a case of thousands of rotten apples spoiling the few...
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I have to tell you, Vic, that in my experience (and it has been the same publishing from any Adobe software or Quark to PDF), that I get a MUCH more manageable file by printing to file using a PostScript printer driver and then manually distilling the generated PostScript with custom settings.
We used to do that with Dragon and Dungeon back issues. Since Acrobat Pro 7 came out, though, we've had better results using that (and now Acrobat Pro 8).
I am confident a single file for this entire product should work just fine (I have done with magazines and books that contain many illustrations and graphics).
It's not a problem of doing it... it's still an open question of which format customers prefer. Judging by the response we've had so far, it seems pretty evenly split, so we'll look into giving you the option.
|
It's not a problem of doing it... it's still an open question of which format customers prefer. Judging by the response we've had so far, it seems pretty evenly split, so we'll look into giving you the option.
Now, that's cool.
I don't think I can say it enough, but you Paizo lads (and lasses) rock. :)
...Even if you don't use Quark. :D
I have noticed an issue with my PDF.
A little background on the PC, I use it for pretty much everything for my everyday surfing (no productivity software). Lately, I've been doing a bunch of YouTube for the new 4e and multiple webpages.
It seems the longer that I have the PDF open, there is a risk of an "I/O" error in Adobe Reader 8. After closing and reopening, the error seems to happen more frequently (after 10 pages or so).
At the point that I received the error, it was on day 3 and I was about page 30 of the main adventure (slow reader and only after/before work). I also had open the Player's Guide at the same time along with Paint so I could reference the maps without scrolling up to the map to see which room was referenced. In addition, I had 2 IE sessions and 2 Windows Explorers.
While scrolling the later pages, the redraw time did increase.
I did a shutdown on the PC and restarted it. While running 1 IE and Windows Explorer, I opened the main adventure and scrolled continuously to the end of the document. The "new page lag" was fine (about 2 seconds) until about page 35. At this point it started taking longer to draw the page (about 1 to 2 seconds longer).
My vote is for a single bookmarked file.
Dukan
tdewitt274,
That might not be an issue with the PDF. But either way, you may want to give Foxit Reader a try.
It is free, and less bloated than Adobe.
NOTE: It doesn't install every possible option initially. After starting it and trying to open a Pathfinder PDF, you might be offered a chance to load some additional options. (The one that comes to mind is the JPG viewer.)
EDIT: Already mentioned. That'll teach me to read a thread backwards...
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I have noticed an issue with my PDF.
A little background on the PC, I use it for pretty much everything for my everyday surfing (no productivity software). Lately, I've been doing a bunch of YouTube for the new 4e and multiple webpages.
It seems the longer that I have the PDF open, there is a risk of an "I/O" error in Adobe Reader 8. After closing and reopening, the error seems to happen more frequently (after 10 pages or so).
At the point that I received the error, it was on day 3 and I was about page 30 of the main adventure (slow reader and only after/before work). I also had open the Player's Guide at the same time along with Paint so I could reference the maps without scrolling up to the map to see which room was referenced. In addition, I had 2 IE sessions and 2 Windows Explorers.
While scrolling the later pages, the redraw time did increase.
I did a shutdown on the PC and restarted it. While running 1 IE and Windows Explorer, I opened the main adventure and scrolled continuously to the end of the document. The "new page lag" was fine (about 2 seconds) until about page 35. At this point it started taking longer to draw the page (about 1 to 2 seconds longer).
Everything you say leads me to the same conclusion: you'd benefit noticeably from adding more RAM.
Just got back from holidays.
SINGLE FILE IS BETTER. (ed. ok now that I'm thinking about this, I kind of like it broken up)
WANT BOOKMARKS.(whatever)
Chiming in late here.
My preference is definitely for a single file, with bookmarks.
Giving us a choice would be cool since it seems like some folks do like the multiple files though (not me).
Thanks,
Sakkara
...multiple .pdfs? Come on guys. You're better than this. Heck, I can even combine them on my own watch because of the protections you set. Perhaps I can appreciate the concern of how "heavy" one .pdf would be as opposed to many, but the dang thing comes zipped together regardless. So, that's not it. Mayhaps this is your way to allow for "page-flipping", but I'm not impressed.
Umm I thought it was in multiple PDFs so that, if you chose to do so, you could distribute copies of certain parts to your players (such as the Forward, the Sandpoint city, and the Journal)
Also, Since the city section is separated, you can have a folder for all your city maps etc and another folder for your bestiaries.
After running the adventure you may want to delete or archive the pdf version, but still have access to the city maps or the bestiary sections.
It would be nice to be able to combine them if you so desired, but I understand why the protection is necessary.
In my opinion its not that big a deal to have them separated, and in some ways I like it.
=-=-
That being said, yeah bookmarks would be nice, especially in the actual adventure section.
Hey folks,
I have a question for you (for research purposes and all that):
Do you notice any performance difference between when you open the file containing the adventure (i.e. the biggest file) versus the other (smaller) files?
I'd like to hear from you folks with drek-hot, super-fast, monster machines, as well as folks with 98lb weakling computers (like mine at home).
** spoiler omitted **
No, it doesn't slow anything down at all.
I do not see a noticeable performance issue scrolling through the large or small files.
How difficult would it be to allow the option of single or multiple files at download? There seems to be enough interest in both. I was surprised at first by the multiple files, but as many have pointed out, there could be advantages.
I would also like to toss in my vote for bookmarks.
|
|
thought I'd add a updated response to this one now that I have the printed copy in my hand.
I'd like to keep it multiple files, after having the book & then seein multiple "chapters" I like not having to go to the beastery for this, or to the Sandpoint "chapter" for this, nice to have them separated & ready to go if & when you need them.
RM
I prefer options. Why can't we have both? :)
I myself would download the whole thing in 1 file, cuts down on the file opening I have to do when looking for something, but being able to take specific parts like the monsters, the towns, etc. could be useful for when I DM (and other DMs too.)
I've waited a while before I weighed in. Figured I'd give the multiple PDFs a chance to grow on me. It hasn't worked out that way. =) I'd much prefer a single doc, and yes, bookmarks are a must.
|
I am in favour of one big file - if it is properly bookmarked! (e.g. "chapters" according to the current split up of Pathfinder #1 in seperate files, "sub chapters" according to encounters).
As a personal side note: I am a european subscriber and therefore have to wait one to two weeks until the printed version arrives. For this reason I felt all the more irritated by the constant interruptions when I had to open a different file:
- "Oh, so this is the cover page! Let's see which file contains the content page."
- "Great, this article references to page xy. Too bad, page xy is in a different file."
Please - for the sake of usability - only offer one single file per issue. This is the standard already set both by your old edition (A)D&D products sold at your store and digital book versions offered by different publishers. These books sometimes take up 60+ MBs - more than any PF issue will ever reach. So please don't worry too much about our computers and stay true to industry standards for usability's sake.
I understand those readers who would like to take fragments of a PF issue with them, but please be honest: You don't rip out your most favourite pages of PF #1 out of the binding, do you? ;-) And if you like one monster, but dislike another: Would your next demand be to offer PF in single page files? [only slightly exaggerating]
Thanks!
Günther
I bought only the pdf of issue 1, and while the multiple files gave me a bit of a pause at first, I'm definitely in favor of keeping the files broken up like this. Loading/scrolling time isn't much of an issue, even an work, but like others, being able to make multiple directories once there are more issues will be a major benefit for me.
I'm also in favor of being able to choose whether to download the single file version, the multiple file version, or both.
Do you notice any performance difference between when you open the file containing the adventure (i.e. the biggest file) versus the other (smaller) files?
No difference/problems using my 750mhz laptop or my 2 ghz desktop computers, both using the current version of acrobat reader. They run just fine.
And I would also strongly prefer a single file.
|
I wanted to add my two cents in on this topic, but my complaint is the security.
My own use of digital files is to create handouts for the players, 90% of which is maps. It is nice as a DM to have a pretty map to refer to. However, I then have to draw the map out on the battle mat for the PCs and they get to look at the 1980s style hand drawn map. Which is a real shame.
I would really prefer access to maps so I can import them into Photoshop (or Gimp for some others) to be altered to fit my specific needs. I can res up the image, alter a room (or remove room numbers), or neighborhood then print it out on multiple pages if necessary.
The online Dungeon supplements that gave us access to the maps and pictures were fantastic. I would take a Map of Mystery (bow before Chris West) and alter it to fit my own game. Or a map fro an AP and make it bigger (eventually lost sharpness but we could live with it).
Ideally, in the make believe world where everything is made to make my life easier, dungeon or battle maps would be available as optional downloads sized 1 inch equals 1 inch and 300 dpi ideally suited for inkjet printing (lots of ink I know but you can change the quality of printing and dpi to deal with that). Yes I know that would make for some huge downloads. But larger maps could be broken into sections. -Do bear in mind I am not talking about city maps here, that would be just plain silly. :)
Anyway, in the real world, I would like to see the security removed. Pirates will still pirate. Keeping honest people honest doesn't stop piracy (locking the front door keeps honest people from sneaking into your house and means when the burglar breaks in you have to buy a new front door also). I am a photographer and I hear photographers complain about copyright violations all the time. Some go so far as suing their own clients. Rather than fight my client and their desire for copying my images, I adjusted my business to welcome it- I sold them the digital image and they can go make as many prints as they want. I adjusted my 20th century thinking to 21st century reality and found a solution for both my business and my clients.
|
|
I would really prefer access to maps so I can import them into Photoshop (or Gimp for some others) to be altered to fit my specific needs. I can res up the image, alter a room (or remove room numbers), or neighborhood then print it out on multiple pages if necessary.
Y'know, you can copy and paste the images or even export the PDF as image files.
|
|
I would really prefer access to maps so I can import them into Photoshop (or Gimp for some others) to be altered to fit my specific needs. I can res up the image, alter a room (or remove room numbers), or neighborhood then print it out on multiple pages if necessary.
Zoom in to get a full screen view of the map, hit PRINT SCREEN. Go in to Photoshop or Gimp, create a new file, and PASTE. Insta-map. :)
Thank you for the PDF!
I would like to see bookmarks/index most of all, and if bookmarks, then one file would be good.
Best.
Hey folks,
I have a question for you (for research purposes and all that):
Do you notice any performance difference between when you open the file containing the adventure (i.e. the biggest file) versus the other (smaller) files?
I'd like to hear from you folks with drek-hot, super-fast, monster machines, as well as folks with 98lb weakling computers (like mine at home).
I've got a fairly middle-of-the-road system, and I don't see any difference. I do see a difference when I open really big (like, 350 page) PDFs.
Pathfinder is much less chewy then that, and I'm sure an unbroken Pathfinder PDF would work like silk for me.
Adobe Reader had long been one of my least favorite pieces of software for this very reason, but Reader 8 actually delivered major improvements in this respect (and in many others), and has once again become my default PDF reader.
I have a little inside info with regards to Adobe, and most folks there were very unhappy with the 6.0 and 7.0 products (5.0 worked very well for it's time). There was a longer than usual gap between 7.0 and 8.0 and as you can see, it was worth it. Adobe put a lot of effort into speed improvements and ease of use, a design philosophy that is continuing in the development of 9.0.
I was happy to run into this thread. When I first downloaded the 'multiple-files' version I was very annoyed. I have a large library of digital files and documents and like to keep them as single files. Normally I would have just combined them myself but the copy protection got in the way. There was still one option (Acrobat 8.0 Pro) to create a 'PDF Package', but the DRM forced a default Adobe index page and flipping through pages was awkward at best. So to sum up, I am thrilled with the 'option' of a single file. You can't please everyone, but multiple choices seem to please the most.
As to the DRM, I fully understand why it's there (tho this seems a new initiative at Paizo? Or did I just miss it?). Unfortunately, like all DRM, it's more of a hinderance than an impediment and it does hamper fair use. It's also pretty easy to get rid of if you feel that strongly about it (I won't tell you how).
I have a bit of a complain about the nature of the Watermarking. I think it messes up the clean lines of an otherwise beautiful product. Perhaps in the future you might be able to find a way to imbed your watermark in a somewhat less intrusive way without losing it's impact on preventing thoughtless piracy.