On 2010-01-18 20:40, yahvuu wrote:
> Philip Rhoades wrote:
>> It still seems counter intuitive that opening a JPG (even if it is a
>> photo rather than a computer generated image) and immediately saving it
>> with 100% "quality" increases the size by 2.5 . .
> so you mean the scale should be different? Like
> 1 .. 10 ... 100 ... 100000
> ^ ^
> | \ extravagant luxury quality for the filthy rich
> current "90"
?? - that's an odd comment . .
> i'm not shure if that would not create even more confusion...
I think an "average" user would expect a saved file with a "quality" of
100% to be the same as the original file ie the same specs and file size . .
> PS: as Michael Schumacher previously noted, the quality value
> is indeed just a number, not a percentage.
Yes, but misleading . .
GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW 2001
Gimp-user mailing list