On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:58:28 +0200, Guillermo Espertino
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We, the users, tend to assume things based on the information we get on
screen.
.. or not on the screen, like percentages. ;)
It's very clear that Photoshop doesn't use the IJG scale, but it
should.
On 7/7/07, Guillermo Espertino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The images I get from the camera are fine. My problem is that if adjust
them, scale them and re-save them without explicitly change the quality
setting they turn out really distorted.
Even though I understand (now) the difference between
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 21:38:57 +0200, Øyvind Kolås [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
GIMP could perhaps even warn a user the first time he presses Ctrl+S
on a an opened JPEG image warning him that even with minimal or no
real changes to the image the signal will be degraded. This should be
a warning of
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2007-07-06 at 2246.00 -0300):
I'm noticing big differences between jpeg files from gimp and photoshop.
Quality as artifacts, smoothing, false colours? Size?
The same image exported as jpeg with the same quality factor (let's take
75% as an example) gives very different
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 21:38:57 +0200, Øyvind Kolås [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the image used in
the JPEG Generation Loss figure in the example in the following text
uses an image that
shows how JPEG compression keeps different aspects of the image intact
across multiple encode/decode cycles:
It seems that we're understanding each other. :-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
yes there does seem to be an issue here. I snipped the generation 0
part of that image did File | Save As...
then reopened the new version and repeated the save several times.
There is continual degradation. This
GG:
Can you clarify where this file is when you do CTRL+S ? You say you
open directly from the camera , do you mean you are opening a file
that is still on the camera ?!
My camera stores the pictures in a Compact Flash card. I use a card reader.
I copy those files to my hard drive, then I
Trying to be more specific: If I open an image from my digital camera
with gimp, adjusts its levels or curves, and re-save it, the saved image
is very deteriorated. If I do the same with Photoshop that doesn't happen.
I think it's problem, but let me know if I'm wrong. At least I know that
I
Mark. Thank you for your reply. I'd like to clarify some of my comments.
You obviously have to compare qualities at similar filesizes. Everything else
is irreelvant.
I don't think the way the quality is expressed (I know, it's not
quality but compression ratio) is irrelevant.
If you came
Owen:
Interesting, what platform are you using?
Ubuntu Linux (7.04) and Gimp 2.3.18
Here if I can do say 10 re-saves at 85% quality, it produces no
discernible changes in picture quality.
In fact I have tried to prove that recompressing jpg pictures reduces the
picture quality and got
101 - 110 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
