Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression
Jim, I found the bug. I imagine this isn't the last time something like this will come up. JPEGs use a fairly simple header setup to store pertinent information in the image. The JPEG standard says the image width, height and color depth should be stored in the FFC0 header the jpeg you have stored the info in a FFC2 header which I had not heard of. It seems there are many flavors of jpeg so little fixes like this may be happening for a while. Attached is a new JpegImage.java which will fix the problem. If you're interested the change was made on line 81. -Eric Dalquist - Original Message - From: Jim Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 11:01 PM Subject: RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression Hey Eric: Been working with the patched stuff on and off all day -- still looks great! Attached is a rather junky macintosh-based jpg that demonstrates the header problem. Let me know if you get a fix. Either way, thanks again for the patch! jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression JpegImage.java - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression
Eric: More specifically, the header from Photoshop 6.0 for Windows seems to work the most reliably. Other Photoshop versions will sometimes give the error. I've yet to install the latest update, but will do so, and test. I'll let you know how it works out. Otherwise, the patch seems to be holding up quite well. In an existing FOP install, we've passed close to 80 or so different images through, all of which worked very well. I can't speak to Daniel Pfuhl's issue of longer XSL documents as ours, while fairly graphics intensive, are only 4-8 pages in length, and the XSL documents are not all that huge. Thanks again! jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 12:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression Jim, I found the bug. I imagine this isn't the last time something like this will come up. JPEGs use a fairly simple header setup to store pertinent information in the image. The JPEG standard says the image width, height and color depth should be stored in the FFC0 header the jpeg you have stored the info in a FFC2 header which I had not heard of. It seems there are many flavors of jpeg so little fixes like this may be happening for a while. Attached is a new JpegImage.java which will fix the problem. If you're interested the change was made on line 81. -Eric Dalquist - Original Message - From: Jim Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 11:01 PM Subject: RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression Hey Eric: Been working with the patched stuff on and off all day -- still looks great! Attached is a rather junky macintosh-based jpg that demonstrates the header problem. Let me know if you get a fix. Either way, thanks again for the patch! jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression
Eric: Latest patch does seem to solve the current header problem quite nicely. Thanks! jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 12:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression Jim, I found the bug. I imagine this isn't the last time something like this will come up. JPEGs use a fairly simple header setup to store pertinent information in the image. The JPEG standard says the image width, height and color depth should be stored in the FFC0 header the jpeg you have stored the info in a FFC2 header which I had not heard of. It seems there are many flavors of jpeg so little fixes like this may be happening for a while. Attached is a new JpegImage.java which will fix the problem. If you're interested the change was made on line 81. -Eric Dalquist - Original Message - From: Jim Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 11:01 PM Subject: RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression Hey Eric: Been working with the patched stuff on and off all day -- still looks great! Attached is a rather junky macintosh-based jpg that demonstrates the header problem. Let me know if you get a fix. Either way, thanks again for the patch! jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression
Hey Eric: Been working with the patched stuff on and off all day -- still looks great! Attached is a rather junky macintosh-based jpg that demonstrates the header problem. Let me know if you get a fix. Either way, thanks again for the patch! jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 4:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression Jim, If you could please email me one of those jpegs it is erroring off on I'll look into the reasons. A fix shouldn't be too hard. I forbgot all about those System.out.println(); calls I had ... thos can be removed. -Eric Dalquist - Original Message - From: Jim Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 12:32 PM Subject: RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression Wow! That works like a charm! Thanks a lot, Eric. In my preliminary tests, Eric's patch moved a pdf with 6 heavily compressed jpgs from over 950 K to just over 50K! Rendering times seem just about as fast, but, more importantly, web users will receive the file that much faster. Very cool stuff. I noticed only a few small problems: First, the renderer does not recognize jpg headers generated by Macintosh Photoshop (it throws a bad jpg header message). Simply resaving the files in Windows Photoshop solved this. Also, there are a few System.out.printlns that probably won't be needed in final release, but may be good for testing. What can we do to get this in the next release? I'll help out where I can, as the patch really moves the functionality of FOP forward. Thanks again, Eric. jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PATCH] JPG Compression Attached is the diff for the patch. This is going against the latest release build. When reading the diff G:\Fop-0.20.1\Fop-0.20.1-clean is the untouched distribution G:\Fop-0.20.1\Fop-0.20.1-dev is the modified distribution. It should work y just copying over the attached files and then deleting src/org/apache/image/GifJpegImage.java since it will not be in use. If I need to follow this up in any way I'll try my best to help. I hope one of the commiters can look at this and deem it worthy to patch FOP. -Eric B Dalquist - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] attachment: traffic_thumb.jpg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] JPG Compression
Jim, If you could please email me one of those jpegs it is erroring off on I'll look into the reasons. A fix shouldn't be too hard. I forbgot all about those System.out.println(); calls I had ... thos can be removed. -Eric Dalquist - Original Message - From: Jim Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 12:32 PM Subject: RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression Wow! That works like a charm! Thanks a lot, Eric. In my preliminary tests, Eric's patch moved a pdf with 6 heavily compressed jpgs from over 950 K to just over 50K! Rendering times seem just about as fast, but, more importantly, web users will receive the file that much faster. Very cool stuff. I noticed only a few small problems: First, the renderer does not recognize jpg headers generated by Macintosh Photoshop (it throws a bad jpg header message). Simply resaving the files in Windows Photoshop solved this. Also, there are a few System.out.printlns that probably won't be needed in final release, but may be good for testing. What can we do to get this in the next release? I'll help out where I can, as the patch really moves the functionality of FOP forward. Thanks again, Eric. jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PATCH] JPG Compression Attached is the diff for the patch. This is going against the latest release build. When reading the diff G:\Fop-0.20.1\Fop-0.20.1-clean is the untouched distribution G:\Fop-0.20.1\Fop-0.20.1-dev is the modified distribution. It should work y just copying over the attached files and then deleting src/org/apache/image/GifJpegImage.java since it will not be in use. If I need to follow this up in any way I'll try my best to help. I hope one of the commiters can look at this and deem it worthy to patch FOP. -Eric B Dalquist - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PATCH] JPG Compression
I'm going to give this a try straight away! Thanks a lot. jw -Original Message- From: Eric Dalquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PATCH] JPG Compression Attached is the diff for the patch. This is going against the latest release build. When reading the diff G:\Fop-0.20.1\Fop-0.20.1-clean is the untouched distribution G:\Fop-0.20.1\Fop-0.20.1-dev is the modified distribution. It should work y just copying over the attached files and then deleting src/org/apache/image/GifJpegImage.java since it will not be in use. If I need to follow this up in any way I'll try my best to help. I hope one of the commiters can look at this and deem it worthy to patch FOP. -Eric B Dalquist - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
