Wow! Thanks for the visual comparison! I can see what you mean. So since ImageCFC uses the java base image class, I'll get results similar to the images on the far right-hand side of your example page (cute family, btw!)? Have I got that right?
As far as the ability to crop, rotate, zoom, err... whatever else it is you can do with an imaging API, are there any pros/cons between ImageCFC vs. Image Flare? Alan Rother wrote: > For me it's all about image quality. > > Image Flare produces a much cleaner, sharper image. Any of the Image CFCs > use the base image class supplied by Java and it's algorithm for producing > jpgs, well... frankly it sucks. In my experience, I find that the Java based > tools leave a sharper image but often leaves a lot of artifacts and garbage > on the images. > > I ran some samples in both today and you can see them on my site... > > http://www.RotherFamily.net/compare/ > > In all fairness to the Java apps... I do use them on my own site... I > have'nt wanted to spend the cash on image flare... I just use it at work. > > > > > =] > > -- http://www.cjordan.us ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| ColdFusion MX7 by Adobe® Dyncamically transform webcontent into Adobe PDF with new ColdFusion MX7. Free Trial. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:271214 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
