Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Photos (Jpg, Png-viewer) --- i don't like it because it launches sluggishly...
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 14:44:50 -0400
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <q03dajp86vjolv9dnugbg59brlfq77lhih@4ax.com>
References: <v7uj16$2fi52$1@dont-email.me> <2nt5ajdvnhbveu80sc59tu31d0ja622cu9@4ax.com> <v7v68t$2m5d5$1@dont-email.me> <bsb6ajpc5n6l0nckklqcb56c0072qmi8ms@4ax.com> <v7vlar$2ofat$1@dont-email.me> <66a61099$3$18441$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <v85gcc$3unbi$1@dont-email.me> <3gmcajdsn3atjeq1p9uhfn9u462ojlf6hs@4ax.com> <v8619m$1p18$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net ezxqyACRUBWoiEmjOA4+xQEFUT8zf9lE5H8InAm0neJ95i0kTA
Cancel-Lock: sha1:S/HkwjQMG/ZPnfvoXrmmPaUi3Ws= sha256:Pf+nsLrFf6EEQG8sTV3x2LJI/n6HTcfJlLmR6yXolRs=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.20.32.1218
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240728-6, 7/28/2024), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Bytes: 5368

On Sun, 28 Jul 2024 18:05:42 -0000 (UTC), Antonio Marques
<no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Jul 2024 13:17:01 -0000 (UTC), Antonio Marques
>> <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> J. J. Lodder <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote:
>>>> Antonio Marques <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 21:47:38 -0600, Tilde <invalide@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 15:19:17 -0700, HenHanna <HenHanna@devnull.tb>
>>>>>>>>> There is a  (Windows) tool called  Photos (Jpg, Png-viewer)  --- i don't
>>>>>>>>> like it
>>>>>>>>> because it launches  sluggishly....
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Esp. in the last 5 days or so, i'm noticing that almost every day
>>>>>>>>> i have to go to Properties to  change it back to
>>>>>>>>> my fav. Jpg, Png-viewer tool
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> because the Windows update (?) is  pushing  Photos  on me.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> is there a Fix for this???
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I have thousands of images from .jpgs to .pngs on my computer.  I use
>>>>>>>> the (free) FastStone Photo Viewer.  It's not only a great image
>>>>>>>> viewer, but offers many other options from selecting by tagged images
>>>>>>>> to bulk re-naming.  It's set as my default viewer.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://www.faststone.org/
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://www.irfanview.com/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have both Faststone and Irfanview, and I like Faststone better. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What I remember last using Irfanview for was when I wanted
>>>>>> to change the default orientation of some pictures that were
>>>>>> usually wrong (downloaded from my off-brand phone). 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> IIRC, Faststone would rotate them okay for PC display by Faststone,
>>>>>> but they would be wrong when uploaded to Face Book. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Opening and saving a lossy format like jpg will usually result in... loss
>>>>> of quality.
>>>> 
>>>> That's ancient folklore, from the times when 640x480 was a big image.
>>>> It may get noticable, but only when you order a huge reduction
>>>> in file size,
>>> 
>>> ....no, it's the logical and unavoidable result of applying a lossy
>>> encoding, all the more since the jpeg algorithm won't be the exact same
>>> every time, and will throw out slightly different parts of the signal. It
>>> will obviously be worse the lower the resolution is to begin with, but
>>> that's a different issue.
>>> 
>> The real point, though, is whether or not any degradation is visible
>> to the naked eye.  A .jpg has to be manipulated several times before a
>> change is visible even by zooming in on the pixels.
>> 
>> The degradation is there in theory, but not in practice for the most
>> part.
>> 
>
>The problem is that it is cumulative and insidious and, to the point, there
>is no need for it. If you know offhand that your source material won't
>suffer more than a couple of iterations, then fine. Otherwise, what would
>be the point of repeatedly reencoding a picture, or a video, or an audio
>file?

I don't think that those who use just .jpgs *do* repeatedly open and
modify their images.

There are those (and I am one of that group) who do this to images,
but I do it in Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop using a .psd or raw file
where the alterations are non-destructive.  

A "couple" is generally understood to mean "about two".  Two
modifications to a .jpg would not cause visible degradation.

I know it's a generality, but the type of person who would be inclined
to repeatedly modify an image would be someone who is using a program
that allows a latitude of modification tools in a program that allows
non-destructive editing.

Again, a generality, but I think most images taken today are taken on
a mobile phone, never printed, and distributed - if at all - from
their phone to someone else's and viewed on a screen no larger than an
index card.

Photos that are edited are mostly taken with actual cameras by people
who use third-party editing systems that are capable of
non-destructive editing.  

Exceptions...sure.