Making sure an image file by email can be seen

  • Thread starter Thread starter Don W
  • Start date Start date
Miles Bader said:
In my experience, jpeg compression is _worse_ than e.g. png when used on
documents, line-drawings, that kind of thing (lots of lines and
high-contrast ediges).

-Miles
Click to expand...

Hello, Miles Bader


It is true that Jpeg can cause the problems you describe, if you use a very
high compression.

But for MOST documents, with text and a few graphics, Jpeg in high quality
is quite good, it reduces the files sizes the most, which is what you want
for sending in email.

I would only use TIFF on Line-drawings. Jpeg is very bad for thin lines and
sharp edges. Or maybe gif or png if the line-drawing is in Black and White
only. Gif is only 256 colors.

I am assuming that the documents that the OP wanted to send was normal
documents such as text and maybe some pictures.
 
WOW! That is a huge image to try and email.
Click to expand...

84Ki is huge?

there's lots of pixels but only two colours (probably black and white)
Most email servers will have a restriction of 10MB, but even if this is not what you are running
into, I'd never recommend emailing something this large. SMTP servers
are not meant for this type of traffic. A small programming fact, when
you send an email it is ALL text. So an image has to be converted to
text.... during that conversion your image balloons to 113905 bytes!
Click to expand...

Just think another 80 like that and the mailbox is full.
 
There was a discussion about this in these groups about a year ago.
http://tinyurl.com/fg47z

ISTR that jpeg was found not to be quite as hopeless as might have
been predicted for documents from an inherently lossy format.

I like jpegs because you can rotate and edit them. GIFs seem much
harder to work with.
Click to expand...

??? I've not noticed any differance, the diference you see may be due to the
way your computer is configured to open gifs vs jpegs.
I don't know about PNG. Can they be edited and rotated and zoomed as
flexibly as jpegs?
Click to expand...

pretty much.
 
Hello, Miles Bader


It is true that Jpeg can cause the problems you describe, if you use a very
high compression.

But for MOST documents, with text and a few graphics, Jpeg in high quality
is quite good, it reduces the files sizes the most, which is what you want
for sending in email.

I would only use TIFF on Line-drawings. Jpeg is very bad for thin lines and
sharp edges. Or maybe gif or png if the line-drawing is in Black and White
only. Gif is only 256 colors.

I am assuming that the documents that the OP wanted to send was normal
documents such as text and maybe some pictures.
Click to expand...


GIFs are best for line drawings, logos, and images with "spot
colors" rather than photos. Works well for screen captures of
menus and dialogs, for example.

GIF has some patent issues, even though (I believe) most apps
still support it. (Microsoft IE, Mozilla, XnView, Faststone,
Photoshop are all OK with it.)

PNG is a newer format, but quite good -- it's lossless, and unlike
JPG, supports 48 bit color. Its compression is comparable to
JPG at "high-quality" settings. The format is now well supported.

JPG is intended for photographic content and that's where
it works best.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Jasen said:
84Ki is huge?
Click to expand...

No, the dimensions are. I know many a program that would freak out
trying to handle a GIF with those dimensions, as a lot of GIF code is
very outdated and was usually only tested to handle typical screen
resolutions.

My suggesion to the OP is to stick with PNG (which was designed to
handle resolutions that large). If the target can't view the image,
recommend a free image viewer, such as Irfanview.
 
Don W said:
ISTR that jpeg was found not to be quite as hopeless as might have
been predicted for documents from an inherently lossy format.
Click to expand...

What I find is that for very "line-oriented" stuff, the only way I can
make the jpeg as small as the PNG is to decrease the jpeg quality a
bunch -- which ends up introducing very obvious artifacts (lots of color
fringes on hard edges), whereas of course the PNG obviously remains
"perfect."

The way I interpret this is that jpeg essentially has problems
representing high-contrast edges, and that large areas of constant color
are something which PNG can compress particularly well.

[It's not a small effect either: using a high-enough quality to avoid
obvious artifacts, jpeg files often seem to be as much as 50% larger
than a PNG file holding the same contents.]
I like jpegs because you can rotate and edit them. GIFs seem much
harder to work with.

I don't know about PNG. Can they be edited and rotated and zoomed as
flexibly as jpegs?
Click to expand...

Pretty much all the image software I know of treats PNG and jpegs
identically (and probably doesn't even distinguish except when reading
or writing the file). I don't know about GIF, as I don't use that
format; I suppose you can think of PNG as being the modern replacement
for GIF though.

-Miles
 
No, the dimensions are. I know many a program that would freak
out trying to handle a GIF with those dimensions, as a lot of
GIF code is very outdated and was usually only tested to handle
typical screen resolutions.
Click to expand...

I am the OP. Maybe I screwed up somewhere when scanning the
image.

I just used the regular settings on my Epson Twain (v5.71)
software. ISTR the output resoultion was 200 or something like
that.

My suggesion to the OP is to stick with PNG (which was designed
to handle resolutions that large). If the target can't view the
image, recommend a free image viewer, such as Irfanview.
Click to expand...

Isn't PNG a rarer format than GIF. I worry that the average basic
viewer (such as the one in XP or in an email program) may not be
able to see PNG files. Is this worry essentially unfounded?
 
GIFs are best for line drawings, logos, and images with "spot
colors" rather than photos. Works well for screen captures of
menus and dialogs, for example.

GIF has some patent issues, even though (I believe) most apps
still support it. (Microsoft IE, Mozilla, XnView, Faststone,
Photoshop are all OK with it.)

PNG is a newer format, but quite good -- it's lossless, and unlike
JPG, supports 48 bit color. Its compression is comparable to
JPG at "high-quality" settings. The format is now well supported.

JPG is intended for photographic content and that's where
it works best.
Click to expand...

Can the Microsoft Fax And Picture Viewer see PNG images?

I tried to check this but my Fax And Pic Viewer doesn't launch. I
used this to launch it:

%windir%\System32\rundll32.exe %SystemRoot%\system32
\shimgvw.dll,ImageView_Fullscreen

But ISTR that XP SP2 can mess up the Fax And Picture Viewer. I cab't
really say.
 
??? I've not noticed any differance, the diference you see may
be due to the way your computer is configured to open gifs vs
jpegs.
Click to expand...

If a GIF or PMG is rotated is it lossless?

I can find only lossless transformation in my picture viewers for
JPGs but not for any other format.

Except in Irfanview. I don't know if Irfanviews's GIF rotatation
is lossess or not. Do you?
 
"]
Is there anything I can do to increase the chances of the
recipient being able to see the image file I send with my emails?
[/QUOTE]
Yes. Send them as MIME.

Beyond that, ask the individuals you e-mail to find a 1-on-1 solution.
Sometimes the image of a document which I email from my Eudora
cannot be seen by the recipient.
Click to expand...
Curious range of groups you've questioned. I'd suggest comp.mail.mime
THE DETAILS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
Click to expand...
*snipped*
If anyone in the group is interested, here is some general info on
MIME you may find useful.
http://www.hunnysoft.com/mime/
 
Don W said:
Can the Microsoft Fax And Picture Viewer see PNG images?
Click to expand...
yes, generally.
I tried to check this but my Fax And Pic Viewer doesn't launch. I
used this to launch it:

%windir%\System32\rundll32.exe %SystemRoot%\system32
\shimgvw.dll,ImageView_Fullscreen

But ISTR that XP SP2 can mess up the Fax And Picture Viewer. I cab't
really say.
Click to expand...

on win-xp on my computer, at least, it can.

likewise, it also displays thumbnails fine (like gif and jpg, unlike most
other "unsupported" formats).

likewise, on xp ms paint can open pngs as well.

....

so, yeah, no real problems there...
 
Don W said:
I am the OP. Maybe I screwed up somewhere when scanning the
image.
Click to expand...
no, that seems about right.
I just used the regular settings on my Epson Twain (v5.71)
software. ISTR the output resoultion was 200 or something like
that.
Click to expand...
that is for dpi.

your image is about 12.75 x 17.55 inches according to this (probably raw
scanner output, uncropped).

typical apps often expect small gifs, as usually gifs are used for smaller
images (banner adds and logos on sites, ...). not huge ones (photos or
scanned images). screen dumps may or may be saved as gifs (this is a toss
up, some use gif, some jpeg, some png, and some plain bitmaps or targa
images...).


now, if you had a scanned document at 200 pixels, well now, you might be
lucky if you can actually read it...
Isn't PNG a rarer format than GIF. I worry that the average basic
viewer (such as the one in XP or in an email program) may not be
able to see PNG files. Is this worry essentially unfounded?
Click to expand...

yeah, anymore partly because png doesn't do animations, and a lot of uses
for gif (banner adds, ...) involve animations. likewise, a lot of the user
community is still using gifs as that is what they used before (and png came
into dominance with a notably small amount of hype...).

in any case, they should be seen fine, as they are pretty well supported by
windows.
 
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.compression.]
If a GIF or PMG is rotated is it lossless?
Click to expand...

if it's rotated a multiple of 90 degrees.
Except in Irfanview. I don't know if Irfanviews's GIF rotatation
is lossess or not. Do you?
Click to expand...

it'd be extra work to make it lossy...

Bye.
Jasen
 
Don said:
I am the OP. Maybe I screwed up somewhere when scanning the
image.
Click to expand...

No, you didn't, you just chose the wrong file format to try to store
the image in. GIFs are not typically used to store images that large,
so any legacy GIF code hiding somewhere will probably freak out trying
to read them.

PNG *was* designed from the ground up to handle that resolution (and
larger) and is fairly well supported by most modern programs, so I'd
recommend that.
Isn't PNG a rarer format than GIF. I worry that the average basic
viewer (such as the one in XP or in an email program) may not be
able to see PNG files. Is this worry essentially unfounded?
Click to expand...

I can't answer that because I don't know what software your target
audience is using. If it's really an issue, you can email them a
decent freeware graphics viewer program such as Irfanview.
 
Can the Microsoft Fax And Picture Viewer see PNG images?
Click to expand...


Oddly, not if it is saved as a PNG on Linux. It shows up a
scrambled mess in Windows. You have to re-save as PNG Tif or Jpg
after opening in photoshop on Windows.

It shows fine if saved as a PNG in Photoshop on Windows, or Gimp
on windows. It still shows up Ok on Linux too.

???
 
Rusty Shakleford said:
Oddly, not if it is saved as a PNG on Linux. It shows up a
scrambled mess in Windows. You have to re-save as PNG Tif or Jpg
after opening in photoshop on Windows.

It shows fine if saved as a PNG in Photoshop on Windows, or Gimp
on windows. It still shows up Ok on Linux too.

???
Click to expand...

I don't know if it was ever mentioned, but one way to ensure that a person
receives an image is to post the image on a web site that accepts images and
then post the link to the image in the body of the email.

One such site is:
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos
You would have to register with them to post a image.

This is maybe the most sure way to get an image to someone, for them to go
to a web site and download the image.
 
Can the Microsoft Fax And Picture Viewer see PNG images?
Oddly, not if it is saved as a PNG on Linux. It shows up a
scrambled mess in Windows. You have to re-save as PNG Tif or Jpg
after opening in photoshop on Windows.

It shows fine if saved as a PNG in Photoshop on Windows, or Gimp
on windows. It still shows up Ok on Linux too.

???
Click to expand...

do the images get larger when saved on windows?
does IE have problems (other than alpha) dealing with linux pngs

what version of libpng are you using on linux?

Bye.
Jasen
 
Back
Top