MS Office Forum / Word / Graphics / December 2003
Edit Picture grayed out
|
|
Thread rating:  |
John G - 16 Dec 2003 14:54 GMT I was confusion about the edit picture being grayed out and after reading some of the earlier posts relating to the subject, I felt I would put my meager two cents in.
As Cindy Meister states "Word's Picture Editor has NEVER been able to "edit" all kinds of graphics, only it's native format, .wmf. In a couple of versions of Word, the Photo Editor was also available for some graphics formats, but it was never part of Word, itself."
I do NOT want Word to edit my photos, that is why I have my photo editing software. But I am not sure if she understands what many people (like myself) are confused about.
It was posted that the Edit Picture command will become available when the picture is in its native .wmf file format. If the Edit Picture is only available when the picture is in a .wfm format AND, you cannot add applications to the Tools->Options->Edit->Picture Editor. Then why is the option there at all?
The option to CHOOSE the picture editor is meaningless. The two applications I can choose from in my copy of Office XP Pro are MS Photo Editor 3 and Word itself. Yet neither program will save a .wfm file. Shouldn't other photo editing applications be available if they were installed you your system?
Cindy states "Over the 15 years or so since WinWord has been with us it's accumulated so many features, it's impossible to make them all available on the menus."
I agree Word has accumulated many features, but I find many of them fall into the category of useless. The Edit Picture option is useless because even if you wanted to use it, what option is there? The only option you have is to use a wfm file, and rarely would I be inserting a wfm file.
Thank you for tour time. I will get off my soap box now ;-)
PS: can anyone tell me how to keep pictures from moving around a document? I set the picture format to not move with text, set horizontal and vertical positions to page coordinates but they continue to move when I move other pictures. I found the moving pictures so annoying that I called Words help line, paid them $32 to tell me there was a glitch in the program and I should upgrade. So I upgraded to XP. Same problem ;-( Another option that I would really like to use but turns out to be more hassle than help.
John Gardner jpgardner@swbell.net
Cindy M -WordMVP- - 19 Dec 2003 10:27 GMT Hi John,
> you cannot add applications to the > Tools->Options->Edit->Picture Editor. > Then why is the option there at all? This has been frustrating users for over a decade... The interface is there, but the graphics program applications (companies that develop them) don't bother to use it. From what I recall, I believe it requires the program to create a registry entry so that it can be picked up in this list. IOW, Word doesn't actively go searching your drive for installed graphics programs; it looks in one place for a listing, and if nothing's in the list, there's no entry.
> I will get off my soap box now ;-) > And how was the weather up there <bg>?
> PS: can anyone tell me how to keep pictures from moving > around a document? I set the picture format to not move > with text, set horizontal and vertical positions to page > coordinates but they continue to move when I move other > pictures. Hmmm. As far as I'm concerned, they shouldn't move when other pictures are moved (unless it's a result of having the option to not allow overlapping activated, and two pictures "bump" each other). But I do recognize, roughly, what you're describing.
1. Be sure you haven't inserted a picture into a TEXTBOX, and then applied text wrap. This is a sure-fire way to have graphical objects jumping all around.
2. Documents created in Word 97 (or from a Word97-generated Normal.dot) will be especially susceptible to problems. The graphics rendering was changed in that version to use the Office Drawing tools, and things weren't very... stable.
3. Graphical objects are always anchored to a position in the text, usually a paragraph. Keep in mind they WILL always be on the same page as that paragraph. Occasionally, if you anchor more than one object to the same anchoring point, they'll interfere with each other (as you describe).
If that happens try using Edit/Cut to take them out of the document and put them temporarily in another document. Be sure to press Enter before pasting each graphic, so that they're anchored separately in this temporary storage.
Edit/Cut the paragraph to which they were anchored, then Edit/Paste Special as "plain text". With any luck, this will remove all traces of the "yuckiness" that was causing the problem. Reapply the formatting. Copy/paste the pictures back in, one at a time. If you have enough paragraphs on the page, place the cursor in a different paragraph before pasting each one.
Cindy Meister
 Signature INTER-Solutions, Switzerland http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Sep 30 2003) http://www.mvps.org/word
This reply is posted in the Newsgroup; please post any follow question or reply in the newsgroup and not by e-mail
:-) John Gardner - 22 Dec 2003 02:55 GMT Hello Cindy
Thanks for your info. If there is a registry entry that can be edited so I can use my photo editing software, I would be very interested. It would make editing photos much easier, even though it is a habit to edit ALL photos before starting a publication. I recommend this even if the option were available. However, it would be nice if I could edit the photo from Word and not have to re-import the photo. Linking the photos or copy/paste from the photo application accomplishes this, But it is not the way I normally import photos using Word. If you Insert photos then you will have to edit them in the photo software, then re-import, re-size, re-border.. Etc. ;-(
Getting my soapbox out again.. So I may get light headed... lol ;-) I agree with you that Word has never intended to be a page layout program. While working with Word, I have found some features to be great, mainly the Word Processing features. Some top-of-the-line page layout programs are very limited in this area. Yet they manage art in the document in a very different way. I find Words art management not only cumbersome but also confusing. From your previous post, I understand that every picture in the document is "anchored" to a paragraph. I am also aware that when the picture is INLINE with text, it is DIFFERENT than when the other text wrap options are set. It becomes a character in the text flow, which makes sense. What doesn't make sense, IMHO, is if I DO NOT want to run the picture INLINE with any text, I do not have an option. All pictures are anchored to something, and most times it will be a paragraph when you choose one of the other wrapping options. Hence, in my eyes it is INLINE (anchored) with some paragraph. If the picture is "anchored" to some paragraph using one of the other text wrapping options and that paragraph flows to another page, the picture will move with the paragraph. I am aware that most times, it is an easy fix, but why did it move at all? Most users do not pay close attention to WHERE the cursor is when they insert a picture. I find the Text Wrapping options misleading because of this. Your description of Inserting a picture is a lot of work for something that IMHO should be easy. If I put a picture on page three of a document, and even LOCK the object, it will still move with the paragraph that it is anchored to or disappear completely. There should be an option that says "DO NOT MOVE" - "EVEN IF JOHN'S SOAP BOX BLOWS UP" ;-) IMHO, it would be much easier to not "anchor" graphics at all, and then allow the user to specify how they wanted the text to flow around the graphic. If the user wanted the graphic to flow with the text, then there would be an option (check box) that would flow with the paragraph using Words current strategy. I agree that these options sound more like page layout options than word processing options, but I have seem many users get very frustrated by pictures moving mysteriously. An option that truly LOCKED the item and allowed text wrapping would at least enable users to choose EXACTLY where some graphics are in a document independent of the text that flows around it.
I also have observed one feature in the text wrapping options that I find useless. It is the THROUGH text wrap option. I understand how the feature is supposed to work, but I see no difference between the Through and the Tight wrapping options. If you place a graphic in the middle of text and allow the text to flow left to right through the graphic, it is very hard to read something like that. Most page layout programs will only wrap text on one side unless it is between two columns of text. Then the text flow will be on both sides and it is easy to read. Using this feature will (IMHO) produce a difficult to read and unprofessional looking document. That is why you rarely see graphics in the middle of text, and why most page layout programs do not have this feature.
Having Words great word processing features along with an option that literally locked a graphic in place would be a very nice program.
Thanks again for your time ;-)
John Gardner
Cindy M -WordMVP- - 22 Dec 2003 11:25 GMT Hi John,
> If there is a registry entry that can be edited so I can > use my photo editing software, I would be very interested. I've never been able to find out what the exact entry is. Supposedly, graphics software manufacturers have (or can get) that information. You might enquire with your favorite program's developers if they wouldn't include this, or perhaps develop a little utility that would do the job.
> I find Words art management not only cumbersome but also > confusing. No disagreement there :-) It probably hasn't helped that, as of Word 97, Word has had to incorporate the "Office drawing tools". That lead to lots of problems, such as fields in text boxes not being "seen" correctly.
> If the picture is "anchored" to some paragraph using one > of the other text wrapping options and that paragraph > flows to another page, the picture will move with the > paragraph. I am aware that most times, it is an easy fix, > but why did it move at all? This has to do with how Word was designed, almost 20 years ago. Internally, Word has no "page" object; pages are "virtual" and result from the text flow. Just as a mental exercise, what would you expect Word to do with something that's been told it should be on "Page 20", but so much text has been deleted that there is only enough to fill 18 pages? Word just wasn't designed to be able to handle this concept.
I discussed this a few years ago with the Word Product Manager, and he went into all the gory details about how Word generates pages. And what it came down to was, if they tried to implement this idea and your document had more than one or two graphical objects Word would never finish repaginating, so you couldn't work.
FWIW, a few years ago I worked out a macro system that will let you associate graphics with particular pages. Using VBA, you can give graphics with text wrap a name. So the macro checks the names of the graphics, and if it starts with certain characters ("Page", for example) followed by a number) the macro knows on which page it should appear. If it's not on that page, it is CUT, then pasted into a paragraph Range on the correct page. The code is not short and sweet, because there are a lot of factors you need to consider, such as: Is there even a paragraph mark on the page in question? Is white space (top/bottom margins) being suppressed? (You can't place a graphic into such an area.)
If you're interested in it, the very basics were published in the Dec. 1999 issue of MOD. These articles are no longer available on the Internet, but the publisher has put them on CD: https://www.mssmartsolutions.com/Orders/cdorders.asp
A more detailed version of the macro is also in the German "Microsoft Word Das Profibuch" from Microsoft Press.
Cindy Meister INTER-Solutions, Switzerland http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Sep 30 2003) http://www.mvps.org/word
This reply is posted in the Newsgroup; please post any follow question or reply in the newsgroup and not by e-mail
:-)
|
|
|