Windows freeware to lock in a 3: or 4:3 aspect ratio for cropping

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| there
| is also the issue that a given raw format might not be readable at some
| point in the future, whereas jpeg always will be.
|
| I find it difficult to believe that no software in the future will be able
| to read older image formats - no matter how hard the software developers
try
| to.

He doesn't grasp the concept.

he does.

*you* don't.

It's like saying
we won't have words in the future, but that
English will always exist. The truth is the other
way around, but he doesn't grasp file formats.

no, it's not like that at all.

if the format is not public, then there's no guarantee that it will be
readable.

I was reading an article
yesterday postulating that programming has become
a very steep learning curve simply because the
usage of a computer is so abstracted. Someone
can be a successful photographer working with
digital images yet with no need to understand
what a file is, how the image is stored, or even
where their images are. Fire up Adobe rental-
ware, log into your online storage, sync your
phone, edit images from yesterday's wedding,
then send them to friends.... There's no need to
have even the barest concept of how that all
happened or "where" the photos are, much less
what they are.

exactly how it should be.

people don't need know how to fix cars when they want to drive to the
store, so why should they know about the inner workings of a computer
just to take and edit photos?

And there are lots of valorizing terms to make
it sound technical: "I'm managing assets in my
workflow" sounds far more official than, "****,
where'd I put that file?"

it's also far more powerful.

you are stuck in the past.

In article , Savageduck
wrote:

In Windows however, not so. BMP is the native image format in that OS. i.e.
used by the graphic kernel.

Not being a Windows user, I don¹t understand this idea of holding on to the
BMP format when there are much better ways to go.

don't lump all windows users based on the actions of a few.

nospam wrote:
In article , Savageduck
wrote:

In Windows however, not so. BMP is the native image format in that OS. i.e.
used by the graphic kernel.

Not being a Windows user, I don¹t understand this idea of holding on to the
BMP format when there are much better ways to go.

don't lump all windows users based on the actions of a few.


I know. As far as I know we only have a single BMP obsessed Windows user in
this NG.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

"JJ" wrote

| I know that BMP stores image data uncompressed. But I also know that it
| stores a 24bpp (RGB) pixel in a DWORD (4 bytes) storage. That's 25% waste.
|

Not actually. It requires a scan line divisble by 4. Maybe
that's what you're thinking of. But that's just for building
the file. As a DIB it's just 3 bytes per pixel. If you create
a 10x10 white BMP and save to disk you can see it clearly.
Each horizontal scan line is 30 bytes. 10 pixels at 3 bytes
each. If you look at it in a hex editor you'll see 2 null bytes
after each 30 FF bytes, rounding up each line to 32 bytes.
The width and height are in the header, so Windows will
unpack it accordingly. And the loaded DIB will be just 300
bytes of value 255.

Thus: 10x10 BMP @ 374 bytes. 54 byte header. 300 bytes
for 100 pixels of data. 20 bytes scan line padding. If the
image is something like 800x600 the padding, if any, will
be negligible. In fact, with 800 x 600 it's zero:
800 pixels wide x 3 bytes per pixel = 2400 bytes per scan
line, which divides evenly by 4.

The pixel value can be handled as a DWORD/long integer
but it's only actually 3 bytes of data. One byte for each
RGB. (Notice the color picker ion any graphic editor.
Typically it's a 6 character hex code. 3 bytes. 24-bit.

A PNG has to store 4 bytes for the alpha channel
AKA transparency percentage value of the pixel. But
for BMP it's just 3 pixels.

"JJ" wrote
|
| - 32bpp: each pixel is stored in a DWORD storage. i.e. 1 pixel per 4
bytes.
|
I think that's the point of confusion. Monitors
and graphics drivers talk about 32-bit display and
that term is common, but there's actually no such
thing. It's 24-bit color. The other byte is for
transparency data, so that Microsoft could show
their semi-transparent techno- kitsch windows on
Win7 and make people think they were getting
something new.

Savageduck wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article , Savageduck
wrote:

In Windows however, not so. BMP is the native image format in that OS. i.e.
used by the graphic kernel.
Not being a Windows user, I don¹t understand this idea of holding on to the
BMP format when there are much better ways to go.
don't lump all windows users based on the actions of a few.


I know. As far as I know we only have a single BMP obsessed Windows user in
this NG.


So you've never run into a situation before, where a
tool doesn't support the entire spectrum of file formats ?

Well, OK then.

Let's take (WinXP) Windows Movie Maker as a poster boy for this.
It only supported Microsoft formats and nothing else.
Requiring the user to use a second tool to make
an actual usable output.

To me "every capability is a possibility" when
cobbling together a solution out of a pile of
software I've got. I don't reject something just
because its old. If a wonderful tool only had BMP
input, I'd still be using it. Some tools are
demonstrators (written by academics), and they
don't necessarily support every format you might like.

There are people out there, writing perfectly fine software,
who don't even know how to craft useful command line
parameters (for their so-called command line programs).
It takes all kinds to make a world. Since the functions
the software performs are actually useful and unique,
we just put up with this.

Paul

In article , Paul
wrote:

Let's take (WinXP) Windows Movie Maker as a poster boy for this.
It only supported Microsoft formats and nothing else.
Requiring the user to use a second tool to make
an actual usable output.

nothing like proprietary microsoft formats to lock you into the
platform.

To me "every capability is a possibility" when
cobbling together a solution out of a pile of
software I've got. I don't reject something just
because its old.

bmp is not being rejected because it's old.

it's being rejected because it's obsolete, as is windows xp.

In article , Savageduck
wrote:

In Windows however, not so. BMP is the native image format in that OS.
i.e. used by the graphic kernel.

Not being a Windows user, I don1t understand this idea of holding on to the
BMP format when there are much better ways to go.

don't lump all windows users based on the actions of a few.

I know. As far as I know we only have a single BMP obsessed Windows user in
this NG.

yep, and apparently not the only one.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| - 32bpp: each pixel is stored in a DWORD storage. i.e. 1 pixel per 4
bytes.
|
I think that's the point of confusion. Monitors
and graphics drivers talk about 32-bit display and
that term is common, but there's actually no such
thing.

yes there is.

It's 24-bit color. The other byte is for
transparency data,

not always.

cmyk is 32bpp or 64bpp with four components per pixel, none of which
are transparency. for hexachrome, there's 6 components per pixel.

you're also assuming each component is one byte. that's no longer true
(and hasn't been for years). most modern apps use 2 bytes per component
(48bpp or 64bpp) or floating point components.

so that Microsoft could show
their semi-transparent techno- kitsch windows on
Win7 and make people think they were getting
something new.

it's much more than just that.

wrote:

In Irfanview:
# Create a pre-selection for your crop by Click&Drag with your mouse.
(Be sure, the upper left corner starts on the correct position.)
# Press Shift+c to get the CustomCrop dialog.
# Adjust the Crop to 3:2 ratio (or whatever ratio you like) and click
the button SaveAndDrawOnImage
# Fine-tune the extent of your crop by dragging the borders of the crop
with your mouse while *keeping the Alt key pressed*.
# If need be: Re-position the crop area by dragging it with the *right*
mouse button.

Thank you for answering the question, as your answer is perfect, if
unintuitive!

Q: What Windows freeware locks in a 3:2 or 4:3 aspect ratio for cropping?
A: Irfanview (and Microsoft Photos and The Gimp - but they're cumbersome).

How to force a fixed aspect ratio in Irfanview crop commands:
# Doubliclick on the image (which opens very quickly in Irfanview)
# Left click drag & then lift up at your approximate desired crop area
# Irfanview: Edit Create custom crop selection (aka shift+c)
# In the "Create custom selection" form, choose your desired aspect ratio
# In the "Create custom selection" form, press "Save and draw on image"
# To adjust just the location, right click on the selection box & drag
# To adjust the area, hold the keyboard alt key & left-click drag an edge

By far, Irfanview is more convenient than Microsoft Photos (slow) or The
Gimp (complicated), so this is clearly the way to go - and - besides -
nobody suggested a better solution anyway!