+- Gimp-Forum.net (https://www.gimp-forum.net)
+-- Forum: GIMP (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Forum-GIMP)
+--- Forum: General questions (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Forum-General-questions)
+--- Thread: jpg compatibility issues (/Thread-jpg-compatibility-issues)
Pages:
1
2
jpg compatibility issues - ajax - 11-19-2017
Until now I thought jpg was the best file format with respect to compatibility. However, recently produced images are turning out NOT to be compatible with much of anything I can find which is not a computer. This includes electronic picture frames (several) and smart TVs (several).
I do notice that there are "Advanced Options" which can be specified when exporting to jpg format. However, I'm lacking knowledge of these factors. Is it possible that I'm inadvertently electing to create files with compatibility issues?
I should point out that these incompatible devices are a few years old. Likely between 8 and 12 years old. However, my principal use for GIMP is to try and preserve old pictures by converting them to digital format. In that, scan printed photos, slides and negatives into GIMP for editing with the idea of producing files that might be useful for future generations. As such, compatibility of the resulting files is the most important factor. Future devices are more important than past (older) ones but this experience is not very comforting when it comes to having the ability to create something that will last for a long time (i.e., at least, outlast me). Rather this experience makes a pretty good case for the inability of digital technology as an aid to preservation.
Does our technology decay faster than paper? Maybe I need to go back to printing.
RE: jpg compatibility issues - Espermaschine - 11-19-2017
Maybe have a look at the manuals for said electronic picture frames and smart TV's to check what it says about file formats ?
RE: jpg compatibility issues - Ofnuts - 11-20-2017
in most cases this is due to devices not supporting "Progressive JPEG" (despite it being over 10 years old). Try unchecking the "progressive JPEG" box in the advanced options when exporting to JPEG.
RE: jpg compatibility issues - ajax - 11-20-2017
(11-19-2017, 09:41 PM)Espermaschine Wrote: Maybe have a look at the manuals for said electronic picture frames and smart TV's to check what it says about file formats ?
I did that prior to posting. Such documentation is pretty light on detail. The particular devices that I have limit support to jpg. Several contain disclaimers such as "only support jpg produced by a camera" (whatever that means) also "may not support files from all cameras".
The disclaimer strikes me as standard business practice. I'd have a hard time believing any claim that guaranteed support of of any/all jpg files.
RE: jpg compatibility issues - ajax - 11-20-2017
(11-20-2017, 12:21 AM)Ofnuts Wrote: in most cases this is due to devices not supporting "Progressive JPEG" (despite it being over 10 years old). Try unchecking the "progressive JPEG" box in the advanced options when exporting to JPEG.
This looks to be the answer. Haven't gotten to every device yet but for some it fixes the compatibility problem.
What does this suggest about long term compatibility?
Does the standard assert what features are required? Maybe this is the wrong place for such a question.
Many thanks for the enlightenment
RE: jpg compatibility issues - Ofnuts - 11-20-2017
Features are rarely removed from the standard. The possible reasons for the absence of "progressive" JPEG in devices:
- It could require a bit more CPU (these devices have very small CPUs, for cost/power reasons)
- People may not like the "progressive" display (it can likely be avoided at the cost of more RAM)
- Device manufacturers don't do the software, they license it (or steal it...) from some software company that never bothered to update to the latest standard (why spend money when people still buy it)
- People don't return the device if it doesn't work with progressive JPEG (they assume it's something wrong with their images, or the software that produced it), so manufacturers just don't find it worth supporting the whole standard.
RE: jpg compatibility issues - ajax - 11-20-2017
(11-20-2017, 07:38 AM)Ofnuts Wrote: Features are rarely removed from the standard. The possible reasons for the absence of "progressive" JPEG in devices:Curiously, I also was surprised to see that the "progressive" format results in smaller files. Possibly not enough to be a big deal but still another minor benefit..
- It could require a bit more CPU (these devices have very small CPUs, for cost/power reasons)
- People may not like the "progressive" display (it can likely be avoided at the cost of more RAM)
- Device manufacturers don't do the software, they license it (or steal it...) from some software company that never bothered to update to the latest standard (why spend money when people still buy it)
- People don't return the device if it doesn't work with progressive JPEG (they assume it's something wrong with their images, or the software that produced it), so manufacturers just don't find it worth supporting the whole standard.
My objective has little to do with how the files are displayed but rather that they DO display on the most universal set of future devices. The only reason that "progressive" would be better for me is if it became so common that the alternative (e.g., whatever that might be called) is omitted from future implementations. Of course this could be provoked by continued development of more options creating stronger desire/need to omit some past capability that may be seen at some future time as so antiquated to never be used.
I'll try to find some folks with newer TVs than mine to see if "progressive" has finally overcome some of the obstacles mentioned but don't know how quickly that might happen.
Also, is there a way to tell which method is used from examining a file that has already been created?
Thanks again for your help!
RE: jpg compatibility issues - rich2005 - 11-20-2017
(11-20-2017, 04:17 PM)ajax Wrote: ...snip...Also, is there a way to tell which method is used from examining a file that has already been created
You can use a viewing application such as XnViewMP example https://i.imgur.com/kQmcE5s.jpg
RE: jpg compatibility issues - Ofnuts - 11-20-2017
On the command line, ImageMagick's "identify -verbose" tool says "Interlace: None" for plain JPEG and "Interlace: JPEG" for progressive ones.
RE: jpg compatibility issues - ajax - 11-21-2017
(11-20-2017, 04:37 PM)rich2005 Wrote:(11-20-2017, 04:17 PM)ajax Wrote: ...snip...Also, is there a way to tell which method is used from examining a file that has already been created
You can use a viewing application such as XnViewMP example https://i.imgur.com/kQmcE5s.jpg
Very nice! Glad to learn of this software. While I do use Linux and have Imagemagic but this is the kind of thing where a GUI is very desirable.
I see that the predecessor called XnView of XnViewMP is packaged as a portable app and distributed via portableapps.com. I do like portable apps and use portable versions of both GIMP & Rawtherapee. Unfortunately, it looks like XnView does not include "Progressive Mode" when displaying properties. Could we expect XnViewMP to be packaged as a portable app as well?