[Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 5:53 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by geoff.

JPG image load and save are welcome additions in PureBasic 3.60, however, SaveImage() would be more useful if it were possible to set the JPG quality.

The current SaveImage() gives about 20:1 compression with corresponding low quality. For digital photographs you might use 3:1 for archiving and 8:1 for Web publishing. You need to set this depending on the application.

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:13 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Pupil.

so basicly you're asking for a SetJPGQuality() command or the adding of an argument to the SaveImage() command? either way would be nice..

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 9:51 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by geoff.

Well, more than nice, fixed 20:1 compression is no use at all for me.

Is this really missing?
Someone tell me if I've missed something here.

BackupUser · Post by **BackupUser** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 10:22 pm

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

I will ad a flag to SaveImage(), no problem.

Fred - AlphaSND

Michael Vogel · Post by **Michael Vogel** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:29 am

I would like to get a better control for the compression level when saving jpeg files, the given 10% steps (1%, 10%, 20%,... 90%, 100%) results are not so perfect for photos. A typically used compression value is 97% or so. Of course, enhanced features (like color sampling, Huffman optimizing etc.) would be fine, but that's another story...

c4s · Post by **c4s** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 11:18 am

Michael Vogel wrote:I would like to get a better control for the compression level when saving jpeg files, the given 10% steps (1%, 10%, 20%,... 90%, 100%) results are not so perfect for photos. A typically used compression value is 97% or so. Of course, enhanced features (like color sampling, Huffman optimizing etc.) would be fine, but that's another story...

+1

davido · Post by **davido** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:32 pm

Dude · Post by **Dude** » Sun Jul 12, 2015 10:44 pm

Who marked this as "[Implemented]"? Hopefully Fred?

Danilo · Post by **Danilo** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:45 am

Dude wrote:Who marked this as "[Implemented]"? Hopefully Fred?

Yes... 12 years ago.

Post by **Fred** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:10 pm

We don't read [Implemented] topic anymore, so it's not exactly the same request, it's much better to open a new topic or it will probably be missed.

Dude · Post by **Dude** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:20 am

Danilo wrote:Yes... 12 years ago.

What? It didn't say that the other day when I read this topic.

PureBasic Forums - English

[Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

[Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality

Re: [Implemented] JPG Encode Quality