I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the quality
slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to 75. If this
numeric value is a Photoshop equivalent like other GIMP features, then 85
is probably a wasted effort. The research* I'm aware of* (note emphasis)
says th
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 20:09:37 +0530, Keith Purtell
wrote:
I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the quality
slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to 75. If this
numeric value is a Photoshop equivalent like other GIMP features, then 85
is probably a was
On 03/23/2012 10:39 AM, Keith Purtell wrote:
> I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the
> quality slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to
> 75.
That's odd. Every version of the GIMP I have ever used defaulted to
the legacy Photoshop value of "75" for
The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and 100.
To my knowledge, the suggested quality rate is a part of the
photograph. My camera suggests 90, my daughter's camera suggests 93,
and I always decrease it to 85, or export to PNG.
Olivier Lecarme
__
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 17:17 +0100, Olivier wrote:
> The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and 100.
A number in the range 0 to 100 is actually by definition a
percentage ;-)
GIMP tries to detect the compression that was used for the original
image and uses those set
2012/3/23 Liam R E Quin :
> On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 17:17 +0100, Olivier wrote:
>> The quality rate of JPEG is not a percentage, simply a rate between 0 and
>> 100.
>
> A number in the range 0 to 100 is actually by definition a
> percentage ;-)
That's a weird definition of a percentage!
Considerin
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 21:52 +0100, Olivier wrote:
> Considering the quality rating in JPEG as a percentage would mean that
> a quality equal to 100 would be perfect, i.e. no loss at all.
Nonsense. A "quality" of 100% means you have chosen 100 out of a
possible 100. "per cent" means "out of 100" in
I suppose the reason I didn't go the preview route is that I'm a bit
annoyed that GIMP doesn't remember that I've changed that setting to 75
every single time I've made a JPG. Now that you suggest it, I could run a
test and see if GIMP's apparent 85 default really does/doesn't make a
significant di
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote:
> Maybe it would be less confusing to make the numbers go from 0 to 255 or
> something. Then 255 would be 100% of the allowed value.
I can hear the wailing and gnashing of users now: "I followed the
tutorial exactly and saved the final JPEG at
Keith Purtell wrote:
I suppose the reason I didn't go the preview route is that I'm a bit
annoyed that GIMP doesn't remember that I've changed that setting to 75
every single time I've made a JPG. Now that you suggest it, I could run
a test and see if GIMP's apparent 85 default really does/doesn'
> I've noticed that every time I save an image in GIMP as JPG the
> quality
> slider bar defaults to 85. Even though I keep changing it to 75. If
> this
> numeric value is a Photoshop equivalent like other GIMP features, then
> 85
> is probably a wasted effort. The research* I'm aware of* (note
>
On 03/23/2012 09:20 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote:
every time you load and
save a JPEG file the quality is reduced and information is lost.
Not true... if nothing changes the algorithm is stable (decoded values
get re-encoded to the same values). You lose quality if you recompute
something different;
* Ofnuts [01-01-70 12:34]:
> On 03/23/2012 09:20 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote:
> >every time you load and
> >save a JPEG file the quality is reduced and information is lost.
> Not true... if nothing changes the algorithm is stable (decoded values get
> re-encoded to the same values). You lose quality i
On 03/24/2012 12:50 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Ofnuts [01-01-70 12:34]:
On 03/23/2012 09:20 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote:
every time you load and
save a JPEG file the quality is reduced and information is lost.
Not true... if nothing changes the algorithm is stable (decoded values get
re-encode
Hello,
I have a five-frame animation to which I would like to add a background and I
don't have enough GIMP knowledge to do it myself, so I've been trying to use
the merge-anim script (http://www.gamers.org/~quinet/gimp/merge/). When I use
it under Debian Linux, with GIMP 2.6.10 (I have also t
All you have to do is make the background layer under the frame, right click on
the frame and select merge down. Do this for every layer and you'll have the
animation with a background.
Sent from my iPod
On Mar 23, 2012, at 10:09 PM, Tsume wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a five-frame animation to
> All you have to do is make the background layer under the frame,
> right click on the frame and select merge down. Do this for every
> layer and you'll have the animation with a background.
THANK YOU! That worked perfectly. Probably the fastest and most helpful
response I've gotten on a forum/
You're welcome! Always happy to help :)
Sent from my iPod
On Mar 23, 2012, at 10:31 PM, Tsume wrote:
>> All you have to do is make the background layer under the frame,
>> right click on the frame and select merge down. Do this for every
>> layer and you'll have the animation with a background.
18 matches
Mail list logo
