On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Frank Gore <g...@projectpontiac.com>wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Mark Phillips
> <m...@phillipsmarketing.biz> wrote:
> > My apologies for this OT post, but I need some help from an "image
> > and I thought the Gimp list might have one or two.
> > When I upload images from a friend's digital camera, a Java web app is
> > able to create thumbnails (they appear black with the title of the image
> > the image area). However, clicking on the missing thumbnail renders the
> > image. When I upload images from a different camera, the same app
> > the thumbnail and also renders the full image. Is there a special setting
> > that camera's have to have set to allow thumbnails to be created? Both
> > types are jpeg. I am not seeing any error messages from the app.
> Yep, definitely off-topic :p
> Those applications you mentioned probably aren't generating
> thumbnails. They're just using the existing thumbnail that's embedded
> in the file. Most cameras embed a thumbnail in the JPG file, some do
> not. Your friend's camera probably just doesn't have those thumbnails
I tested a "bad" image and a "good" image using Jeffrey's Exif viewer (
http://regex.info/exif.cgi), and both images had an embedded thumbnail. The
only difference I saw in the two files from the two cameras was that the
image from the bad camera had this warning;thumbnail size does not match
image size. The image size from the bad camera was 5,184 × 3,456 and the
thumbnail was 160 X 120. I think this warning is referring to aspect ratio.
Anyway, I could not see any difference in the data from both pictures, but
then I am not an image expert.
> To keep this on-topic: Gimp and most other image editors have an
> option to include a thumbnail when saving a JPG file. I typically
> disable this option for web graphics to make the file size smaller.
> Frank Gore
> THE place to talk photography!
Gimp-user mailing list