batches for web
Jump to message:
-
message
20090703044059.GC22586@shallowsky.comnot available-
batches for web —
alec,
07 Jul 2009 06:27 AM
- batches for web — Bob Long, 07 Jul 2009 07:41 AM
- batches for web — Michael Schumacher, 07 Jul 2009 01:47 PM
-
message
4A53D72B.4070107@yahoo.comnot available- batches for web — David Gowers, 08 Jul 2009 03:19 AM
-
batches for web —
alec,
07 Jul 2009 06:27 AM
-
batches for web —
alec,
02 Jul 2009 09:43 PM
-
batches for web —
Sven Neumann,
02 Jul 2009 10:06 PM
- batches for web — Jay Smith, 02 Jul 2009 10:38 PM
-
batches for web —
Sven Neumann,
02 Jul 2009 10:06 PM
As a registered user, you can subscribe forum threads in order to get notified when replies are posted. Just log in at the right top of the page if you already have an account, otherwise you can register for free.
| Permalink: | 4A52CEAB.4070303@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date: | 07 Jul 2009 06:27 AM |
| From: | alec |
| Subject: | batches for web |
Hi...
Akkana Peck wrote:
> Does Resize not do what you want? (I don't have DBP installed
> right now, but I thought it could scale images and looking
> at the web page I would guess Resize is what does that.)
Do you have a link to that plugin? I've searched quite a bit and David's
Batch processor has seemed the best so far, but I'm still(after a couple
years now) new to GIMP.
>
> ...Akkana
>
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
> On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 15:43 -0400, alec wrote:
>> I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
>> figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
>> option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
>> images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
>> Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
>> for me? Thanks!
>
> Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
> web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
>
Huh, I thought that lower resolution would make the file size smaller so
web images would load faster. No?
Thanks-
Alec
>>
Akkana Peck wrote:
> Does Resize not do what you want? (I don't have DBP installed
> right now, but I thought it could scale images and looking
> at the web page I would guess Resize is what does that.)
Do you have a link to that plugin? I've searched quite a bit and David's
Batch processor has seemed the best so far, but I'm still(after a couple
years now) new to GIMP.
>
> ...Akkana
>
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
> On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 15:43 -0400, alec wrote:
>> I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
>> figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
>> option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
>> images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
>> Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
>> for me? Thanks!
>
> Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
> web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
>
Huh, I thought that lower resolution would make the file size smaller so
web images would load faster. No?
Thanks-
Alec
>>
_______________________________________________
>> Gimp-user mailing list
>> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
>> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>> Gimp-user mailing list
>> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
>> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
| Permalink: | 4A52DFF4.3050506@oblong.com.au |
|---|---|
| Date: | 07 Jul 2009 07:41 AM |
| From: | Bob Long |
| Subject: | batches for web |
alec wrote:
> Akkana Peck wrote:
[..]
>> Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
>> web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
>>
> Huh, I thought that lower resolution would make the file size smaller so
> web images would load faster. No?
Depends what you are *really* referring to.
See http://www.scantips.com/basics01.html
> Akkana Peck wrote:
[..]
>> Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
>> web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
>>
> Huh, I thought that lower resolution would make the file size smaller so
> web images would load faster. No?
Depends what you are *really* referring to.
See http://www.scantips.com/basics01.html
--
Bob Long
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Bob Long
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
| Permalink: | 20090707114705.163950@gmx.net |
|---|---|
| Date: | 07 Jul 2009 01:47 PM |
| From: | Michael Schumacher |
| Subject: | batches for web |
> Von: alec <firestick13@gmail.com>
> > Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
> > web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
> >
> Huh, I thought that lower resolution would make the file size smaller so
> web images would load faster. No?
Absolute resolution (aka 'image size'): yes
Relative resolution (aka 'pixels per inch'): no
See also "72 dpi myth", e.g. at http://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html
HTH,
Michael
> > Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
> > web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
> >
> Huh, I thought that lower resolution would make the file size smaller so
> web images would load faster. No?
Absolute resolution (aka 'image size'): yes
Relative resolution (aka 'pixels per inch'): no
See also "72 dpi myth", e.g. at http://www.scantips.com/no72dpi.html
HTH,
Michael
--
GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
| Permalink: | 23f4e3390907071819k71a91fb2o826075b5c... |
|---|---|
| Date: | 08 Jul 2009 03:19 AM |
| From: | David Gowers |
| Subject: | batches for web |
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Patrick Horgan<phorgan1@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The truth is that Gimp displays to you using your screen resolution, so if
> you originally created an image at 72dpi and 216x216 pixels and another
> image at 4800dpi and 216x216 pixels, Gimp will display them the same.
Sort of true, see below..
> While
> they look the same, if you look at image properties with <ALT><RETURN> or
> set the disply units to inches in the bottom border and move around the
> image, you can see the difference. One is reported as 3" across and the
> other as .045" across. The resolution is used by Gimp to translate to
> inches and inch derived units for you.
>
> If you go into image/resize, and only change the dpi, Gimp will report to
> you that the image is a different size in inches, but the pixels are not in
> any way changed.
>
> Various image file types like jpg and png store resolution and Gimp does
> store that for you. Devices are supposed to scale the images so that on
> their display resolution they will appear the same size as in the images
> native resolution. Some devices/software actually do this.
Like GIMP (toggle View->Dot for Dot off). When Dot for Dot is off,
GIMP displays the image at a scale matching the comparitive
resolutions of the screen and the image.
> If you print
> something and it comes out the wrong size, some times you can open it in
> Gimp, change the resolution and resave. The only change will be in the
> stored resolution, the file's image data is completely unchanged, yet it
> will now print a different size!
> The truth is that Gimp displays to you using your screen resolution, so if
> you originally created an image at 72dpi and 216x216 pixels and another
> image at 4800dpi and 216x216 pixels, Gimp will display them the same.
Sort of true, see below..
> While
> they look the same, if you look at image properties with <ALT><RETURN> or
> set the disply units to inches in the bottom border and move around the
> image, you can see the difference. One is reported as 3" across and the
> other as .045" across. The resolution is used by Gimp to translate to
> inches and inch derived units for you.
>
> If you go into image/resize, and only change the dpi, Gimp will report to
> you that the image is a different size in inches, but the pixels are not in
> any way changed.
>
> Various image file types like jpg and png store resolution and Gimp does
> store that for you. Devices are supposed to scale the images so that on
> their display resolution they will appear the same size as in the images
> native resolution. Some devices/software actually do this.
Like GIMP (toggle View->Dot for Dot off). When Dot for Dot is off,
GIMP displays the image at a scale matching the comparitive
resolutions of the screen and the image.
> If you print
> something and it comes out the wrong size, some times you can open it in
> Gimp, change the resolution and resave. The only change will be in the
> stored resolution, the file's image data is completely unchanged, yet it
> will now print a different size!
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
| Permalink: | 4A4D0DDE.6040206@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date: | 02 Jul 2009 09:43 PM |
| From: | alec |
| Subject: | batches for web |
Howdy...
I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
for me? Thanks!
-Alec
I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
for me? Thanks!
-Alec
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
| Permalink: | 1246565206.9787.13.camel@bender |
|---|---|
| Date: | 02 Jul 2009 10:06 PM |
| From: | Sven Neumann |
| Subject: | batches for web |
Hi,
On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 15:43 -0400, alec wrote:
> I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
> figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
> option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
> images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
> Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
> for me? Thanks!
Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
Sven
On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 15:43 -0400, alec wrote:
> I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
> figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
> option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
> images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
> Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
> for me? Thanks!
Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
Sven
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
| Permalink: | 4A4D1AF1.9010306@JaySmith.com |
|---|---|
| Date: | 02 Jul 2009 10:38 PM |
| From: | Jay Smith |
| Subject: | batches for web |
On 07/02/2009 04:06 PM, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 2009-07-02 at 15:43 -0400, alec wrote:
>
>> I finally installed David's Batch Processor (after months of trying to
>> figure out how to do batches) but I'm surprised that I don't see an
>> option for changing resolution. I'm simply trying to prepare
>> images(lots of them) for the web. Did I miss something in Daves
>> Batches? Or maybe someone has a link to something else that would work
>> for me? Thanks!
>
> Resolution (as in dots-per-inch) is irrelevant for images used on
> web-pages. The only thing that counts is the number of pixels.
>
>
> Sven
But... resolution is important for print output ... which is something I
am interested in.
So I think Alec's question still stands.
Jay
_______________________________________________
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


