Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-24 Thread Liam R E Quin
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 17:17 +0100, Olivier wrote: > The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and 100. A number in the range 0 to 100 is actually by definition a percentage ;-) GIMP tries to detect the compression that was used for the original image and uses those set

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-24 Thread Olivier
2012/3/23 Liam R E Quin : > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 21:52 +0100, Olivier wrote: > >> Considering the quality rating in JPEG as a percentage would mean that >> a quality equal to 100 would be perfect, i.e. no loss at all. > Nonsense. A "quality" of 100% means you have chosen 100 out of a > possible 10

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Ofnuts
On 03/24/2012 12:50 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote: * Ofnuts [01-01-70 12:34]: On 03/23/2012 09:20 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: every time you load and save a JPEG file the quality is reduced and information is lost. Not true... if nothing changes the algorithm is stable (decoded values get re-encode

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Patrick Shanahan
* Ofnuts [01-01-70 12:34]: > On 03/23/2012 09:20 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: > >every time you load and > >save a JPEG file the quality is reduced and information is lost. > Not true... if nothing changes the algorithm is stable (decoded values get > re-encoded to the same values). You lose quality i

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Ofnuts
On 03/23/2012 09:20 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: every time you load and save a JPEG file the quality is reduced and information is lost. Not true... if nothing changes the algorithm is stable (decoded values get re-encoded to the same values). You lose quality if you recompute something different;

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Owen
> I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the > quality > slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to 75. If > this > numeric value is a Photoshop equivalent like other GIMP features, then > 85 > is probably a wasted effort. The research* I'm aware of* (note >

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Mark Bourne
Keith Purtell wrote: I suppose the reason I didn't go the preview route is that I'm a bit annoyed that GIMP doesn't remember that I've changed that setting to 75 every single time I've made a JPG. Now that you suggest it, I could run a test and see if GIMP's apparent 85 default really does/doesn'

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Chris Mohler
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: > Maybe it would be less confusing to make the numbers go from 0 to 255 or > something. Then 255 would be 100% of the allowed value. I can hear the wailing and gnashing of users now: "I followed the tutorial exactly and saved the final JPEG at

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Keith Purtell
I suppose the reason I didn't go the preview route is that I'm a bit annoyed that GIMP doesn't remember that I've changed that setting to 75 every single time I've made a JPG. Now that you suggest it, I could run a test and see if GIMP's apparent 85 default really does/doesn't make a significant di

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Liam R E Quin
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 21:52 +0100, Olivier wrote: > Considering the quality rating in JPEG as a percentage would mean that > a quality equal to 100 would be perfect, i.e. no loss at all. Nonsense. A "quality" of 100% means you have chosen 100 out of a possible 100. "per cent" means "out of 100" in

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Olivier
2012/3/23 Liam R E Quin : > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 17:17 +0100, Olivier wrote: >> The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and >> 100. > > A number in the range 0 to 100 is actually by definition a > percentage ;-) That's a weird definition of a percentage! Considerin

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Liam R E Quin
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 17:17 +0100, Olivier wrote: > The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and 100. A number in the range 0 to 100 is actually by definition a percentage ;-) GIMP tries to detect the compression that was used for the original image and uses those set

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Olivier
The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and 100. To my knowledge, the suggested quality rate is a part of the photograph. My camera suggests 90, my daughter's camera suggests 93, and I always decrease it to 85, or export to PNG. Olivier Lecarme __

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Steve Kinney
On 03/23/2012 10:39 AM, Keith Purtell wrote: > I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the > quality slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to > 75. That's odd. Every version of the GIMP I have ever used defaulted to the legacy Photoshop value of "75" for

Re: [Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread phanisvara das
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 20:09:37 +0530, Keith Purtell wrote: I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the quality slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to 75. If this numeric value is a Photoshop equivalent like other GIMP features, then 85 is probably a was

[Gimp-user] Why does saves as JPG default to quality 85?

2012-03-23 Thread Keith Purtell
I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the quality slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to 75. If this numeric value is a Photoshop equivalent like other GIMP features, then 85 is probably a wasted effort. The research* I'm aware of* (note emphasis) says th