Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Frank Steinmetzger <Warp_7@×××.de>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Your opinion on jpeg encoders, please
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 19:31:52
Message-Id: X/ymYu9xb2TafYJS@kern
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Your opinion on jpeg encoders, please by antlists
1 Am Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 05:12:07PM +0000 schrieb antlists:
2 > On 07/01/2021 02:22, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
3 > > On 04/01/2021 23:37, Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
4 > > > However I noticed that the latter procuces larger files for the same
5 > > > quality
6 > > > setting. So currently, I first save with a very high setting from
7 > > > Showfoto
8 > > > and then recompress the whole directory in a one-line-loop using
9 > > > imagemagick’s convert.
10 >
11 > > You lose some extra quality when doing this due to recompression. What
12 > > you should do is save in a lossless format (like png or bmp) and then
13 > > convert that to jpg.
14
15 But that would lose a lot of EXIF stuff in the process. I know that
16 recompression reduces quality, that’s why I use a very high setting
17 (98…100) for the intermediate file.
18
19 > If you're doing that (which I recommend), I set my camera to "raw + jpeg",
20 > and then dump the raw files to DVD. That way, it doesn't matter what happens
21 > to the jpegs as you can always re-create them.
22
23 I don’t really live the RAW way. They take up sooo much space and my
24 camera’s OOC jpegs always look far nicer than anything I can produce with
25 darktable/rawtherapee. Most of the time there are colour fringes and
26 sometimes sensor patterns that I can’t get rid of. I already have a backlock
27 of several 100, if not 1000 pictures. Working from RAW would take even more
28 time. In some specific scenes I actually use RAW+Jpeg, mostly in scenes with
29 a very high dyamic range. But as I said, the results are not very
30 satisfactory.
31
32 > If you've only got jpegs (why are you using a rubbish camera :-)
33
34 I have an Olympus O-MD E-M5 MkII and a MkIII, that’s far from rubbish. ;-)
35 But the OOC jpegs are so good that I don’t need a lot of post-processing.
36 I tend to read manuals and set up my equipment to get the best result right
37 away, rather than point+shoot and do the enhancements later.
38
39 > then just dump the original jpegs to DVD - that's why what Google do is so
40 > bad - they compress it to upload it from your Android phone, and then
41 > delete the original! AND THAT'S THE DEFAULT !!!
42
43 I do some light enhancements on my images (like local contrast, exposure
44 correction, alignment), shrink them to – say, 6 MP – and only keep the
45 result. With convert, this gives me about 500 kB to 2 MB files, depending on
46 the scene and chosen quality from 70 to 90. For 95 % of cases, that’s
47 enough. There are exceptions of course, such as portraits, or the odd
48 animal picture captured in just the right moment.
49
50 --
51 Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’
52 Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network.
53
54 Rather idle around than do nothing at all.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Your opinion on jpeg encoders, please antlists <antlists@××××××××××××.uk>
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Your opinion on jpeg encoders, please Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk>