- Location
- Bloomington, Indiana
testing attachment size
- Thread starter Mahk_Adams
- Start date
- Location
- Bloomington, Indiana
The first one was better.
Started out at 227203 bytes. Has a JPEG "quality" factor of 95 and contains 11584 bytes of profile data. Strip the profile data and drop the quality factor down to a Net-reasonable value of 75 and you'll come up with this version attached. 85197 bytes. "Smaller" even than your second one.
You'd certainly see a difference in the quality between them if you were to print them out, but can you really see a difference on screen?
Glen
Started out at 227203 bytes. Has a JPEG "quality" factor of 95 and contains 11584 bytes of profile data. Strip the profile data and drop the quality factor down to a Net-reasonable value of 75 and you'll come up with this version attached. 85197 bytes. "Smaller" even than your second one.
You'd certainly see a difference in the quality between them if you were to print them out, but can you really see a difference on screen?
Glen
Attachments
- Location
- Bloomington, Indiana
Glens;
Thanks.
I'm trying to resize these to make them reasonable for dialup, but clear enough analyzing. My photo program only has a 'resize' feature--neither the profile data nor the quality factor that you mention. I like to take high resolution photos because I may use them for other things than the internet, so I have just been reducing the size by about 20% when I post.
Suggestions??
Thanks!
Thanks.
I'm trying to resize these to make them reasonable for dialup, but clear enough analyzing. My photo program only has a 'resize' feature--neither the profile data nor the quality factor that you mention. I like to take high resolution photos because I may use them for other things than the internet, so I have just been reducing the size by about 20% when I post.
Suggestions??
Thanks!
My recommendation is to use what I use.
Fetch what you need from the "Binary Releases" link on the upper left side of the page at http://www.imagemagick.org/ unless you want to "roll your own at home," in which case fetch the source code instead.
It's primarily a set of command-line tools. I'd be glad to help you with getting up to speed with the command-line if you're not already acquainted with it. I should think just a few basic skills (understanding command formation in general, really) is all that's necessary for the simple manipulation like we're talking about.
The command I'd used on your image was:
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>convert -strip -quality 75 <your_image>.jpg <new_image>.jpg</pre><hr />
With just slightly more command complexity, it's possible to make "webifiable" versions of an entire directory full of the high-quality images you want to archive. If you've got decent command line tools on hand you can process an entire directory structure (hierarchy) in one fell swoop.
The unix version of the package has almost all the manipulation capabilities available via the graphical image viewer component. This may include the version for the Mac as well, since that's unix inside. I'm not sure about that though. Ironically, the last time I looked at any rate, the Windows version has a viewer which can do little more than display the image!
Fetch what you need from the "Binary Releases" link on the upper left side of the page at http://www.imagemagick.org/ unless you want to "roll your own at home," in which case fetch the source code instead.
It's primarily a set of command-line tools. I'd be glad to help you with getting up to speed with the command-line if you're not already acquainted with it. I should think just a few basic skills (understanding command formation in general, really) is all that's necessary for the simple manipulation like we're talking about.
The command I'd used on your image was:
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>convert -strip -quality 75 <your_image>.jpg <new_image>.jpg</pre><hr />
With just slightly more command complexity, it's possible to make "webifiable" versions of an entire directory full of the high-quality images you want to archive. If you've got decent command line tools on hand you can process an entire directory structure (hierarchy) in one fell swoop.
The unix version of the package has almost all the manipulation capabilities available via the graphical image viewer component. This may include the version for the Mac as well, since that's unix inside. I'm not sure about that though. Ironically, the last time I looked at any rate, the Windows version has a viewer which can do little more than display the image!
