On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:04:33PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > Generally, I just use gimp. I tried using display on a 3932x4656 image > and it was very slow (20 seconds to open) and I couldn't do anything > with it. Gimp was much faster and usable. Even konqueror (I rarely use > any file manager) gave me a scrollable image in less than a second. I'm > not sure what I'd use for a lot of thumbnails. > > -- Bruce I normally resize the photos, e.g. down to 1000x750, using mogrify. Then I use display to decide which are worth working on.
After I've finished a batch I do something similar to check that they "fit together" when viewed. Usually I can only do a few pictures at a time because they need so much work - reduce tilts (rotation) and try to correct distortions (perspective - from angling the camera, and lens : usually barrel distortion on wide angles, but pincushion on zoom on my "still/movie" compact). That's apart from the curve manipulation to bring out the detail I don't find thumbnails useful - if I've taken over a hundred pics there will be several which look alike at tiny sizes. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
