Re: IPP, JPEG, Exif and dimensions
Anton Thomasson via ipp <[email protected]> Thu, 25 Sep 2025 20:55:19 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABFDNXSBqfZJMwc=PfdSAL3Gw+Ft_nVw8-mvsS=F1OhiknVzOg@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi It is hard to argue that always going to PWG or URF raster is better. With potentially fewer and fewer JPEGs qualifying to be sent directly, i guess direct JPEG printing is almost becoming obsolete. (And fewer JPEGs in circulation in general). Though i suspect that there are at least some printers that have JPEG but not a raster format support. And presumably a purpose-built photo printer will do a good job with a straight JPEG. So i do stand by that my lossless baselinifier has a point, but i should probably have left my latest silly experiment out of the backstory. You are quite right, x/y might be different than what is imaged if the user says to make it so. But the core of the question remains; what does the IPP attributes indicate: The jpeg stream contents or the image after rotation according to the Exif header? One would need to know that to ascertain if the JPEG can be sent as-is or not. A real-world example: Pictures from my phone are "3000x4000" if i ask basically any normal application, but libjpeg and "file" see the JPEG data dimensions, which are actually 4000x3000. If a printer has max jpeg dimensions of 3000x4000, can i send it the image? > There might be "valid" reasons why the hardware can't handle (for example) long scanlines but can otherwise handle decoding tall images. Alright, reasonable point; but for that to hold true it would imply that the x and y dimensions meant are those of the JPEG data, not those after Exif-ordered/suggested transformation. So problem solved? > Official definition of what? If the x/y dimensions in the spec are those of the JPEG data or those that a user would normally consider the dimensions of the image when viewed (i.e. after Exif transformation). > I encourage you to grab images from a digital camera and not necessarily from a smartphone, since smartphones often do a lot of post-processing and use something other than JPEG as a primary storage format. If you don't have access to such files I am happy to send you some examples. To do what do you mean? See how badly i destroy it with my scaling? So Android has something different now too? I wouldn't know; i've been on Sailfish OS for 12 years and Meego before that. :) That would be appreciated, i don't think i have anything reasonably modern in that department. Br, Anton _______________________________________________ ipp mailing list [email protected] https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp