And the really befuddling baffling part is that with some of the stock
images I looked at Gimp seems to read their resolution fine. So I am
guessing that with these stock images there is some image manipulation
going on, then gimp is correctly reading for them?
But on the pictures from my cameras (I just ran another test with a
different camera) Gimp is bound and determined that the resolution is 72.
If it helps anyone in troubleshooting, the 2 cameras are a Nikon D-70
and a FujiFilm Finepix S5000. Well I just checked with an old mini, an
HP Photosmart 635 - same situation.
Roel Schroeven wrote:
> Bob Meetin schreef:
>> See example images at www.dottedi.biz/codesamples/broken
>> The image (vanilla) was taken with an ordinary digital slr. I know it
>> is large - if you check the other image, same problem. It is 300dpi.
>> You can see this if checking with windows image properties or with
>> photoshop. However, when I check in Gimp (2.2) using
>> Image --> Scale Image
>> both horizontal and vertical display as 72.
>> When I load some stock images into Gimp they are correctly display the
>> resolution, be it 150, 300, whatever. So the question, "What is it
>> about this image that is fooling gimp?" Is it a setting in Gimp that I
>> might have innocently messed up or other?
> Not only Gimp is confused. I've tried the images in IrfanView and
> XnView. There is a difference between the two images:
> - img1_resized.jpg: both XnView and IrfanView think it's 72x72. PIL, the
> Python Imaging Library, thinks it's 72x72 too.
> - img1_vanilla.jpg: XnView says ??? x ???, IrfanView leaves the boxes
> empty, PIL has no DPI information.
> That's without looking into the EXIF-data. When I look there, both
> XnView and IrfanView have XResolution = 300 and YResolution = 300 in
> both images.
> So the difference between Gimp on one hand and Windows image properties
> and PhotoShop on the other hand seems to be that the others extract the
> resolution-information from the EXIF-data while the Gimp doesn't.
Gimp-user mailing list