# Solved: Wierd Thing With Jpegs



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

I just switched over to Vista with a new machine and moved all of my pictures into a folder. Most of the pics are showing the proper thumbnail but a few are not. Their height is correct but they are real skinny. If I use Vistas viewing they don't look any different but when I open them in Paint Shop or any other photo app they display correctly. If I save them as a new file the thumbnail is skinny again. Anyone have any hot tips?

Here's a snap of what I mean.....


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Bump


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

I'm going to ask that this be moved to the photography section. maybe someone there has seen this issue before.


----------



## ferrija1 (Apr 11, 2006)

Try making the colomns (for Name, Date Taken, etc.) larger.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Can you attach one of these "bad" images ???


----------



## angelize56 (Apr 17, 2002)

Check in the mail Guzyer O'Grand??  

Thanks Laura!


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb said:


> Can you attach one of these "bad" images ???


I'll resize it and attach after work.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

To run a test the other way .... 
Here's a photo resized and saved from Irfanview 4.0 in Vista HP.
Same problem ???

Can't duplicate you problem.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

angelize56 said:


> Check in the mail Guzyer O'Grand??
> 
> Thanks Laura!


Yeeeeehaaaaaaaaaa. Thanks


----------



## LauraMJ (Mar 18, 2004)

You're welcome.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb I copied your pic and don't have that problem. I also don't have that problem when I resize the ones that are giving me grief. From what I can tell it has something to do with the actual size of the pic but I haven't been able to pin it down. If I resize the pic it shows up in the folder just fine. Here's an example. Now keep in mind I have not run into that problem with any new pics I have done and placed in my new box and the only one I am concerned about is the Mt. Baker shot. Everything else is junk.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Was playing w my Vista HD yesterday ... I was bored.
It's back in storage waiting ... and I'm running on my XP HD today.

I wonder how the thumbs would look if you used something like Irfanviews Thumbnail Browser.
http://www.irfanview.com/ ... the new version 4.0 is for Vista.

I have a hunch the picture is OK ... But Vista is having problems.
Anyone have any ideas ???


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb said:


> I wonder how the thumbs would look if you used something like Irfanviews Thumbnail Browser.


No offense but I really don't like that program. If I view them with my Canon software they are fine.



Noyb said:


> I have a hunch the picture is OK ... But Vista is having problems. If I view them with my Canon software they are fine.
> Anyone have any ideas ???


There is no doubt it's a Vista issue but the question is why with just 6 pic's? Like I said it has to be something about the size(s) it doesn't like. Now the weird thing is I have hundreds just like them and they are not causing any trouble. I have taken the problem pics and converted to another format, saved and converted to Jpeg again. Same issue. If I convert them to Tiff, save and view... same thing.

btw the two sizes I'm having trouble with are 3072 x 2048 & 3084 x 2052.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

No Offense taken.

Maybe you should host the original &#8220;offensive&#8221; pictures somewhere &#8230;
Then we (someone) can determine if it&#8217;s all Vista installations &#8230;. or just yours.
Maybe you Imaging software ???

If you don&#8217;t know how to host large files for TSG &#8230; 
I&#8217;ll PM you my Email Address &#8230; Then you can email me a couple of the original offenders and I&#8217;ll host them.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

I'll fire you off one I really don't care about so you can view it on your Vista system and tell me if you get the same issue. Will your your ISP allows a 6mb e-mail?


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Yes .. One at a time for the Email Address I gave you ... for sure
They say I have a 1 gig email box ... never tried it.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Well we're trying it now cuz I sent you one.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Got it ... will add others here as/if they arrive... Nice pic.
I'm on my XP drive right now ... anyone ???

http://2noyb.home.insightbb.com/Squirrel2.jpg


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Try this ... and see if it's fixed ...
http://2noyb.home.insightbb.com/Play.jpg


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

That's made a difference. What did you do?


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Normally &#8230; The ppi of the image is meaningless &#8230; (boy will this start an argument here) &#8230;
But I thought an image default ppi of 32768 was a bit ridiculous and maybe confusing Vista.

Without re-sampling the image &#8230; (changing it in any way) &#8230; 
I change the default physical size to 10 inches wide &#8230; resulting in a default ppi of 308&#8230;
Which is more normal &#8230; As normal goes.

I used Photoshop (could&#8217;ve used Irfanview) ... Can you do this ppi &#8220;resizing&#8221; in Canon ???

Notice the picture size 3048x2052 (resolution) stayed the same after resizing.
See if you can do this.

Redoak would sure love your pics.
Got to take the wife out for a double date lunch .. be back in a couple hours.

Before &#8211; After resizing default image size &#8230; ppi only


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb said:


> Normally  The ppi of the image is meaningless  (boy will this start an argument here)
> But I thought an image default ppi of 32768 was a bit ridiculous and maybe confusing Vista.


Doesn't make sense when all the rest of my pics are not affected. If Vista is confused it's because of another reason and only on those few. 


Noyb said:


> Without re-sampling the image  (changing it in any way)
> I change the default physical size to 10 inches wide  resulting in a default ppi of 308
> Which is more normal  As normal goes.


10" wide is not normal in my house because I have quite a few printed at 18 x 12 and I would rather downsize than up when the time comes. Let me explain my usual procedure. I shoot all my pics as RAW. Then I download to my computer and with PSP XI I convert them to TIFF. From the Tiff file I make whatever adjustments I want and save the pic. If I decide to have something printed I change the size to 18 x 12 and save as a Jpeg because that's the format accepted by the photo printing co. that I use. 


Noyb said:


> I used Photoshop (couldve used Irfanview) ... Can you do this ppi resizing in Canon ???


As stated I use PSP XI and it will do it if need be... however.... I don't think there is a need because not every pic is troubled. If they were then there would be a need. 


Noyb said:


> Notice the picture size 3048x2052 (resolution) stayed the same after resizing.
> See if you can do this.


The file size got smaller so something changed. Keep in mind I don't want to save anything less than 18 x 12


Noyb said:


> Redoak would sure love your pics.


Don't tell him about them cuz I would rather post them myself if I so decided.


----------



## lister (Aug 10, 2004)

What Notb is saying is that so far in the 21st Century, a PPI of 32768 is 'a bit high'; as an inch of print would take a 1073,741,824 pixel image - over a thousand megapixels.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

lister said:


> What Notb is saying is that so far in the 21st Century, a PPI of 32768 is 'a bit high'; as an inch of print would take a 1073,741,824 pixel image - over a thousand megapixels.


I'm aware of that but lets keep in mind why I started this thread. I have approx. 6 pictures out of hundreds that are affected so what he mentions won't be the cause of my problem. He may have solved my problem but what I want to know is why just those few and not the others? Makes sense to me.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

What's the dpi of the 6 bad pics ... As compared to the good ones ???

I have a hunch it's how you're using Canon software ....
and a Vista problem with large dpi's
That's all that's making sense at this point.

The only numbers that are important at this point is the overall Pixel size ...i.e.... 3048x2052... (whatever)
Your printer/display routines will take care of the physical resizing for display/printing purposes ...
and one would think .. thumbnails


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Guyzer said:


> The file size got smaller so something changed.
> Keep in mind I don't want to save anything less than 18 x 12


jpeg are compressed files ... every time you open a jpeg and re-save/re-compress ... the file size will change.
A compression of a compression is like a rumor ... So disregard the file sizes of jpegs as an exact number.

Forget inches ... You can only print the best you got ... i.e... the overall pixel size.
The printer/display routines will decide the physical size when you tell it what you want.
Then the computer will determine the dpi to print/display to your physical requirements.
It doesn't matter what the image thinks it's default ppi (physical size) is.

Your 3048 pixel wide pictures will print at 18 inches wide ... with a print dpi (resolution) of 170
Thats good but kinda marginal.

Boy ... This should stirr up another ppi/dpi argument 

If you want ... Email me a bad tif ... they're uncompressed formats.
We can work on them ... without them becoming rumors.

I'm still thinking the Vista Thumb problem is the large default ppi number in the image(s)... that is really meaningless.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

After all that Babble ... I've determined your problem is probably Paint Shop Pro.
I reinstalled my Vista ... and duplicated your problem with your original picture.
It displays OK .. but the thumb is distorted.
In a way, this is good news  ... your Vista is OK (or at least normal )

Fixing your original .. then re-creating a similar sized image ... I could not duplicate the problem using Photoshop CS2.

The problem should be in the first two EXIF numbers below.
I'd suggest to try re-saving using more a normal PPI number ... like 300 ... and see if that works.

Can any Paint Shop users jump in here ??? ... I'm not familiar with its resizing routine.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Ok I have solved my problem. When I went to " save as " I decided to try running PSP's Wizard from within the optimizer selection. The encoding was set to " standard " as it aways has been and I changed the compression value to 1 instead of 6 which was the pre-set. In the end it did make a slight change to the actual file size, a few more kb's actually but everything else stayed the same. The thumbs now show as they are meant to. I have no explanation as to why that made a difference but it did. I'm going to root around PSP's preferences and see what if anything I can find there.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb I just fired off the new saved file. See if you can figure out what changed.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

The originals are the best you have.
Not sure what editing your doing ... but I'd keep the original camera images ..
and save to copies ....
Just in case.

Edit .. Will do when it arrives.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

New Size Looks good ...

Remember ... I don't care what the Width > Height > and PPI is ... 
as long as the overall pixel count stays the same.
... unless you've cropped to a new aspect ratio ... which I think you've done.
This assumes you're trying to keep the original resolution and not resize the image physically.

If you don't resample the Image .... You could change the width to 18 inches ..
Then you'd see that it would print at 171.33 dpi ... It's only a calculator at this point.
I've read that the optimum is about 260dpi.

Is this making sense ???

I'm thinking PSP should work this way.

Old >> New >>> my resize.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Too bad you don't have Photoshop or PS Elements 5.0 ....
We could have talked the same language.

Does PSP have an Auto Color button ????
http://2noyb.home.insightbb.com/Squirrel4.jpg

It's interesting that XP didn't show this sizing/thumbnail problem.


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb said:


> Too bad you don't have Photoshop or PS Elements 5.0 ....
> We could have talked the same language.


I did have Elements 5.0 on my other computer but my sister now has that along with the software. I was so used to my PSP stuff that I couldn't get used to the PS. Such be life.


Noyb said:


> Does PSP have an Auto Color button ????


Yes but remember this key thing. I didn't make any changes to the pic other than what I mentioned. I thought that was a wise thing to do considering I was trying to pin down a problem. No sense creating any more confusion.



Noyb said:


> It's interesting that XP didn't show this sizing/thumbnail problem.


 I'll bring the issue up with Bill next time we do lunch.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

:up:


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

Noyb said:


> New Size Looks good ...
> ... unless you've cropped to a new aspect ratio ... which I think you've done.


If I did it wasn't intentional and was done behind the scenes by PSP.


----------



## Noyb (May 25, 2005)

Your picture was 3084 x 2052 pixels ... The Aspect Ratio = 1.5
You mentioned a 18 inch x 12 Inch print ... AR = 1.5

Most Cameras shoot an AR of 1.33 ... (or 4:3 in fractions)
That's why I thought you resized it ... cropped it to a new AR ...
to fit your desired print size.

What ever you did .... Worked


----------

