Le 4/2/2009, "Martin Stolle" <martin+gee...@stolle.name> a écrit:
>Image rotation is by default not lossless and even jpeg-lossless >rotation has limitations. While "hard rotating" is an option that we >should provide, I don't think it should be the only-option (nor should >it be the default). The question is: why is there an EXIF rotation flag? Why cameras with an orientation sensor do not record the images in the right orientation? I think it is because it is time consuming. Am I wrong? But Geeqie runs on a real computer, where CPU is not a problem. So, why do we bother with this workaround? Why do not always hard-rotate the image, reset that boring EXIF flag (and the embedded thumbnail), so everybody is happy? That's what I do as soon as I transfert my pictures from the camera (using a script). And even if jpeg-lossless rotation has limitations, are they really significant? I mean, serious photographers do not rely on jpeg anymore, and use it only as final distributing format. They work from RAW files, and generate the jpeg with the correct orientation. So, they don't need to rotate them. And for others, do they see a difference after rotating jpeg files? So I vote for a hard-rotation. And I agree that the 'view' commands should not modify the files... Only the 'edit' commands should. My 0.02 ... -- Frédéric ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Create and Deploy Rich Internet Apps outside the browser with Adobe(R)AIR(TM) software. With Adobe AIR, Ajax developers can use existing skills and code to build responsive, highly engaging applications that combine the power of local resources and data with the reach of the web. Download the Adobe AIR SDK and Ajax docs to start building applications today-http://p.sf.net/sfu/adobe-com _______________________________________________ Geeqie-devel mailing list Geeqie-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geeqie-devel
