Re: Digikam-users Digest, Vol 80, Issue 35

Send Digikam-users mailing list submissions to
	[hidden email]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	[hidden email]

You can reach the person managing the list at
	[hidden email]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Digikam-users digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Update on 2.5 Windows crashing (Paul Verizzo)
   2. Frame display question (Paul Verizzo)
   3. re JPEG lossiness, PNG (Paul Verizzo)
   4. Re: re JPEG lossiness, PNG (Dr. Martin Senftleben)
   5. Re: re JPEG lossiness, PNG (Remco Vi?tor)
   6. Wishes for future versions (Remco Vi?tor)
   7. Re: Wishes for future versions (Marie-No?lle Augendre)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 20:38:30 -0500
From: Paul Verizzo [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Digikam-users] Update on 2.5 Windows crashing
Message-ID: [hidden email]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20120113/1e90a832/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 20:41:23 -0500
From: Paul Verizzo [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Digikam-users] Frame display question
Message-ID: [hidden email]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-users/attachments/20120113/cc323e51/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 21:26:53 -0500
From: Paul Verizzo [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Digikam-users] re JPEG lossiness, PNG
Message-ID: [hidden email]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

"I'm not sure if that's a rhetorical question. Anyway, I was doing some

changes on the images, and didn't want to lose more info due to the
jpg-compression.
I think of it this way (maybe I'm wrong): every time I change a jpg
image, some info of the origional gets lost and the image cannot ever
be put in the original state by just reverting the changes, because it
drops the original info and adds in some new based on the changes.
But (that's what I think) when I change a png image, I can get the
original state back by reverting the changes.
I knew that png makes the files bigger, but I still do not understand
how the jpg can become 10 times bigger by converting it to png. Even
the raw images of the same picture are less than half the size of the
png file.
I'll probably never fully understand the mysteries behind this,
because I can't even see the difference. I'll probably stick to jpg
even though some information is not stored in the file. Why don't
camera manufacturers use a non-lossy format that produces smaller
images than the raw images? Or isn't that possible at all?

Regards

Martin"
--------------------------------------
Martin, you are correct about changing and saving JPEG files.  Oh, I wish I had known that a dozen years ago!  I manipulated many of my 2.1mp (!!) files, not understanding the consequences.  It was all pretty new back then, not many good maps for us digital Conquistadors!

Now that hard drive space is so cheap, the solution to this problem is simple: Save your original (RAW and/or post-RAW or out-of-the-camera JPEG's) files in a subfolder, possibly named, um, "Originals". Mark them all "Read Only."  Now you can manipulate to your heart's content and you always have an original to fall back on. 

I also save all files with 100% quality level, or whatever the "no compression" setting is for whatever program you are using.  Again, disk space is so cheap. 

PNG certainly should not be ten times as large as a JPEG. If you took a picture of an all monotone color, that would be maximum JPEG compression.  Every pixel is just like the others.  But I still can't imagine what would cause your issue. PNG is a nifty format with lots of potential and uses, but the not-lossiness isn't an issue if you save your originals as I've suggested. JPEG rules the jungle still, there is no downside as long as you don't keep working on, and then saving a file repeatedly.

I hope this helps a bit in your quest.

Re: Digikam-users Digest, Vol 80, Issue 35