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.
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.