Yes definitely it makes a differenceThe bigger the HTML and graphics in the original, generally the bigger the book.
For graphics.
- use JPEG for photographs. Make them the EXACT size in pixels they come out in the final ebook version. If you have a paint program try varying the save options to adjust the compression. It is a compromise between quality and file size. However you may not be able to tell the difference between high quality (say 70 in JPEG speak) and super high quality (say 90+), so you can compromise with no visible effects
For cartoons, computer graphics, etc. Use GIF images If you have a paint program, fill in any odd stray pixels (e.g. clean up scanned images). Think large blocks of sold color. Sort of like a cartoon. This makes a big difference
For HTML, the most efficient code is hand edited HTML. However this might be impractical
When you use an HTML editor, they tend to generate very inefficient HTML code. For example bold-on, bold-off, italic-on, italic-off with no text between. This extra makes no visible difference, but inflates the size of your files.
Either you can edit this stuff out manually (hardwork) or you can use an "HTML compressor" on your files (use it on a copy) to strip out unnecessary tags. Then compile. You should be able to find something like this at shareware sites like webattack.com
In my experience. Word generates quite inefficient HTML codes, and most purpose made HTML editors are much better at generating efficient HTML codes.
If you know HTML coding, then you can fix some of Word's inefficiencies manually after the files come out of Word.
Another idea, if you are using Activ E-Book Compiler, then you can use the include feature to avoid repeating things like menus, etc. on every page (assuming they occur on every page). Again this can save space.
See this thread (make sure you copy whole URL including topic=88)
http://www.ebookfriends.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=1&topic=88
