Prev: Tutorial how to use Irfanview 4.25 to rotate, shrink, & rename batch photos
Next: DVD Ripping Software or Mac
From: Paul Furman on 4 Apr 2010 15:27
Elmo wrote:
> ...
> To rename based on date & GPS, shrink file size, and set DPI & pixels:
> * With desired photos still selected in the Irfanview Thumbnail viewer ...
> * b ... aka Thumbnail:File->Start Batch Dialog with Selected Files
> * Batch conversion:Press the "Create New Folder" button at top right
> * Batch conversion:Name the new folder something like "small pics"
> * Batch conversion:Doubleclick on the newly created "small pics"
> * Batch conversion:Press the "Use current look-in directory" button
> * Batch conversion:Press the "Start Batch" button
> * When done, exit out of the batch dialog and then out of Irfanview
> Voila!

I didn't see any instructions on renaming from exif. OK, I just found
that below.


> All digital photographs in that folder will be rotated properly; they will
> be renamed based upon EXIF date & GPS data; and they will be shrunk to
> 100KB and 640x480 pixel size and 72dpi resolution; and all EXIF/IPTC and
> thumbnail data will be removed from the emailable copy of the photograph.
>
> Notes:
> * Those are my settings, previously saved by Irfanview; your desired
> settings may vary.
> * Irfanview 4.25 saves the last 15 rename patterns; so you can have a
> variety of desired patterns.
> * Obviously EXIF information such as GPS coordinates & orientation must be
> saved by your camera; press the E button in Irfanview to view your EXIF
> data.
> * Recommended batch saved settings are the following:
> - Set "Batch conversion - Rename result files"
> - Set "JPEG/GIF save options" to "Set file size = 100KB (RIOT Plugin)"

I'm not sure this makes sense for most cases, jpeg file size will vary
depending how much detail.


> - Set "Batch Conversion" options to "RESIZE"; "Set long side = 640 pixels";
> "Set DPI value = 72"; and "Preservec aspect ratio".
> - Set "Batch rename settings" to "$N-$E36868(%Y%m%d_%H-%M-%S)$E402-$E404";
> this appends the date and GPS coordinates to the original file name.

Ah, OK, I set up something like that in full screen mode to show fl,
shutter, aperture...

> Further improvements are always welcome!

I almost never use thumbnail view. Just hit 'B' for batch, and save
settings for various needs. I'm finding irfanview less handy with 12MP
files though I've used it for years and always loved the speed. Also, I
use lightroom these days for most batch work but it's quite a lot slower.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
From: Paul Furman on 6 Apr 2010 11:35
Tim wrote:
> Elmo wrote:
>> Tim wrote:
>>
>>> Why are you setting the resolution to 72 pixels per inch? If they
>>> are to be emailed and viewed on screen the resolution doesn't matter
>>> at all
>>
>> What is the right answer to recommend to batch shrink common photos
>> to be emailed?
>
> Resolution is only applicable to printed images, or applications that show
> your image on a virtual piece of paper. Something like a word processor, a
> desktop publishing application or something with "print preview".

Setting 72 ppi could be useful if people want to print a low res web
image; that'll cause it to print by default at a size similar to what
you see on screen, where a 300 ppi setting would come out of the printer
at postage stamp size, but it has no effect on file size on disk.


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
From: Paul Furman on 6 Apr 2010 11:42
Elmo wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 10:49:22 +1000, Tim wrote:
>
>> Which is exactly why it makes no sense at all. An image that is sharp and
>> contains a lot of fine detail will be over-compressed and could potentially
>> be ruined by forcing a file size on it.
>
> I understand your point but I don't understand the mathematics. Apparently
> this Irfanview feature uses something called a "RIOT Plugin".
>
> Googling, I find RIOT stands for the "Radical Image Optimization Tool".
> http://criosweb.ro/software/RIOT.dll
>
> It looks like GIMP also utilizes the RIOT (http://luci.criosweb.ro/riot)
> Radical Image Optimiation Tool (http://registry.gimp.org/node/20778).
>
> I wish there were a Wikeipedia on this RIOT Radical Image Optimization
> Tool; but none yet.
>
> So, I guess, the real question, is how well does the RIOT Radical Image
> Optimization Tool work in Irfanview batch mode. (works well enough for me)

If the target size was larger, this could prevent blocky artifacts in
smoothly graded soft areas of the images that would have been reduced by
default compression, but could degrade highly detailed images that would
normally produce larger file sizes.

The way to understand jpeg compression is try saving some files of
varying detail with extremely low quality setting and zoom in on the
results. You will see how it works by simplifying similar areas into
rectangular blocks.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
From: Paul Furman on 7 Apr 2010 11:30
me wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 08:35:37 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Setting 72 ppi could be useful if people want to print a low res web
>> image; that'll cause it to print by default at a size similar to what
>> you see on screen, where a 300 ppi setting would come out of the printer
>> at postage stamp size, but it has no effect on file size on disk.
>
> That implies a fair amount of assumption about the
> application/feature/driver set up used to print he photo, doesn't it?
>
> html browser vs image viewer vs image editor vs image printing app.

Html would change things but any program that prints jpegs should use
dpi by default for sizing. That's what it's there for. Same if you drag
into a Word document. Granted, I often have my printer default set to
'best fit' to fill the page.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
From: Paul Furman on 7 Apr 2010 11:32
Elmo wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 08:35:37 -0700, Paul Furman wrote:
>
>> Setting 72 ppi ... [will] cause it to print by default at a size similar to what
>> you see on screen, where a 300 ppi setting would come out of the printer
>> at postage stamp size, but it has no effect on file size on disk.
>
> Interesting.
>
> Ummm... so what PPI/DPI settings SHOULD we recommend for batch shrinking
> and renaming suitable for emailing family photos to others?

Something like 300 if it's high res pics but for grandma to print 100k
email snaps, more like 75 dpi as she'd expect them to print the same
size as on screen.

> 300?
> 600?
> 1200?
> ?


--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Tutorial how to use Irfanview 4.25 to rotate, shrink, & rename batch photos
Next: DVD Ripping Software or Mac