Image pdf files


I’m currently working with the demo version of DT and have a few questions. Much of my research database consists of image pdf files, not text pdfs. What is the best way to still be able to use at least some of DT’s search capabilities? Entering keywords and the like? (The files are images of journal articles, photocopies of old books, etc., that have not been OCR’d.) Btw, I have been linking these files, not actually importing them.

Also, when I drag in a Word .doc file, it converts automatically to .rtf. If I remember correctly, I read on this board that there is no converstion of .doc files, per se, and therefore formatting is lost. Since I have formatted the files to make them easier for me to find information, I am not particularly keen on losing the formatting. Is there a work-around for this? These are .doc files that I may add to or edit, so I do not want the file ‘locked’ (which has kept me from printing them to a .pdf file).

The potential of this program is staggering, if a little (ok, sometimes a lot) overwhelming. I’m hoping to find something that I can use instead of my current file folder tree organization and DT seems to have everything needed and more.

One last thing: I’m on a Mac and am awaiting Tiger. How does DT integrate/use/not use Spotlight? Do they duplicate or complement each other?


Yes, and yes, and - give it time. I’m a writer, banged my head against every note-taking app out there, and after a while, the fog cleared and this is all - all! - I use. Okay, I make a sticky now and then. . .

Looks like the integration is going to be great. Look around the forum - but you’ll be able to try it out in a few days!

For image-only PDF files, you can search by the name of the file (you can change the name to the document title, if necessary, using the Name field in the Info pane). You can also add snippets of information into the Comments field of the Info pane, such as keywords, author, etc. DT can find this information in searches.

If by formatting you mean bold or italic text, DT captures that formatting in OS X 10.3.x. DT captures the text of a Word document so that searches and contextual recognition are possible. Edits of this captured text have no effect on the original Word document. To edit the original document, open it from the DT text window or its Info pane (Path) and it will open under Word. I could talk about synchronization, but the easiest thing to tell you is that you can reimport the edited Word file into DT and delete the original text capture (unless you wish to keep version information).

Spotlight cannot index the contents of DT’s current database structure. In the future, DT will alter the database structure to allow indexing by Spotlight.

Spotlight and DT complement each other. Spotlight doesn’t have the artificial intelligence features of DT nor, of course, DT’s writing and editing tools. DT also facilitates capture of information from the Web. So DT will remain a uniquely powerful information management tool.

zozo, thanks for the encouragement. It is going to take me a while to get comfortable with all that DT offers, but it sounds as if it’s definitely worth the effort. (I probably won’t get Tiger until May 3rd - I could not resist Amazon’s rebate even if it meant waiting for them to ship on the 29th instead of shipping for arrival on the 29th (as Apple is doing).)

Bill, your idea about using the Info comments sounds like it will do the trick. I do wish I could reliably OCR most of the pdfs, but I just don’t want to chance losing important information because of a slip in recognition. I also have some scans of very old books (with the long-s) which, of course, makes OCRing them much too labor intensive, so the comment field will most likely be enough for DT to find the files when I need them.

I understand what you’re saying about rtf files, though my formatting goes beyond just bold and italics. I also use horizontal lines, different fonts (though usually only switching between ariel and times), lots of line spacing, etc., to break things up since a single block of text starts to look like a solid block of scratches to me, especially when I’m tired.

I am very glad to hear that DT does not alter the original Word .doc file when it imports, and re-importing when the file has been updated shouldn’t be too onerous. It’s sounding more and more as if the powerful search capabilites of DT will make that little extra step worthwhile.

Sometimes it feels as if all my research information is in the same warehouse that’s featured at the end of the first Indiana Jones movie, where the Ark is essentially “lost” even though it’s been properly stored. I’m hopeful that DT will let me feel a bit more secure that my “lost” data can be found.

My thanks to you both for your ideas and comments.

Regarding Word “doc” files … you could print them to PDF files, and then import those. That would retain the words (for indexing/searching) and the format.

Thanks, touchstone. It’s a good idea for the more important files I have, though I have too many to want to do all of them. To do it incrementally, as I update the files, sounds like it would work.