Better indexing on bitsavers

[vrs]

> It's *could* - problem I've always found is that tools to handle multi-
> image TIFF files are pretty thin on the ground; they either don't bother
> at all (and assume one image per file) or they try and buffer the whole
> lot into memory (for 100 A4 page scans in one file, that's Not A Good
> Thing). Only about 20% of tools I've come across over the years actually
> try and handle TIFFs properly (as I've said in the past, even
> Imagemagick isn't great because it buffers data to 32-bit colourspace in
> memory regardless of the actual images' bit depth)

The spectacular badness of TIFF viewers (at least at the free-as-in-beer
level) is why I prefer PDFs.  Despite their problems, the PDF viewers seem
*way* better at rendering (and printing) the pages.  (Though I am sure there
are other platforms which have no decent PDF viewer.)

    Vince