|Summary:||additional image information not maintained when rotating|
|Product:||[Applications] kuickshow||Reporter:||A T Somers <andre>|
|Component:||general||Assignee:||Carsten Pfeiffer <pfeiffer>|
|Latest Commit:||Version Fixed In:|
Description A T Somers 2003-04-21 23:31:35 UTC
Version: 0.8.5 (using KDE 3.1.0) Installed from: SuSE Compiler: gcc version 2.95.3 20010315 (SuSE) OS: Linux (i686) release 2.4.18-4GB A lot of digital camera's include additional information with a JPEG, containing things like date&time, shutter-timing, etc. When rotating a picture made with such a camera, this info is lost. I think that should not happen. I would expect maybe an additional field that says "Rotated by Kuickview", but not the loss of info.
Comment 1 Carsten Pfeiffer 2003-04-22 13:17:23 UTC
Subject: Re: New: additional image information not maintained when rotating On Monday 21 April 2003 23:31, you wrote: > A lot of digital camera's include additional information with a JPEG, > containing things like date&time, shutter-timing, etc. When rotating a > picture made with such a camera, this info is lost. I think that should not > happen. I would expect maybe an additional field that says "Rotated by > Kuickview", but not the loss of info. Hmm, indeed, that's very bad :-/ I'll try to implement lossless image rotation for jpegs, that would also preserve the other jpeg information. The problem is that the image saving code is in Imlib, a separate library, which apparently doesn't handle those things. Maybe I should start maintaining imlib... Best wishes Carsten Pfeiffer -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEVAwUBPqUkTaWgYMJuwmZtAQEM9ggApt2QrzKR7SuSJMN2AJAE9pNwVVjvf+u3 NHI/Mx3wDpkospSGBak1ESNhwxx3QT++2rHupJ56M1Uc4F9dPRADa4YqY4yY5ksL SF2VrzbEi6PlpEFLBNoZ9Eh6WFu+gFOrXyKBGNy1r2iGlwbJtzRbO0ALpgeHHd18 9iYN2ITx5f5hFoTGphyl1BMvB7ad31BeewwDpLNRtLGpDi42UECbzeUW/TN7zyRi SetQjQpIIFmzyZL573AVFn1h4rwRxki+asRGraHxoi8du1sNHnHrltj6EohtytfQ Kz3MRUxGdBflsZcD3IXlmlidF6TPlHnXNsd5mwuS7AJ8zazvwXuNJg== =BDDc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment 2 Aaron J. Seigo 2003-07-08 12:51:54 UTC
*** Bug 59672 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Dominik Stadler 2003-10-23 09:03:29 UTC
I think Bug 55777 is a duplicate of this, one of them should be marked duplicate.