Irfanview freeware bug? Batch JPEG lossless autorotation. Large directory failure consistent

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Susan, Jul 18, 2008.

  1. Susan

    Susan Guest

    Can you reproduce this WinXP Irfanview v4.10 bug?

    1. Start with a large directory of JPEG files (at least a few hundred
    pictures, say about 400 or 500 from a normal photo shoot). These must have
    a few files that are not rotated yet, but which have the proper Exif tags.

    2. Select all 500 files with Irvanview "File->Thumbnails->Options->Select
    All" and then press "File->JPEG Lossless Operations->Lossless Rotation With
    Selected Files->Auto Rotate (according to Exif orientation, if
    available)->Optimize JPG File->Apply original Exif date/time to new
    file->Keep all APP markers (default)".

    3. Every time I do this, only the first hundred or two hundred pictures are
    rotated; the rest seem to not be touched. If I select a hundred pictures at
    a time (slow at best in the Irfanview thumbnail viewer), then, over
    successive operations, I can manage to auto-rotate the entire set.

    This looks/smells/tastes either like user error (but where?) or a
    previously unknown bug in Irfanview.

    Can another confirm that Irfanview batch lossless autorotation by Exif tags
    fails to run on all selected files for large numbers of files?
    Susan, Jul 18, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Susan

    Matt Ion Guest

    Re: Irfanview freeware bug? Batch JPEG lossless autorotation. Largedirectory failure consistent

    Susan wrote:
    > Can you reproduce this WinXP Irfanview v4.10 bug?
    >
    > 1. Start with a large directory of JPEG files (at least a few hundred
    > pictures, say about 400 or 500 from a normal photo shoot). These must have
    > a few files that are not rotated yet, but which have the proper Exif tags.
    >
    > 2. Select all 500 files with Irvanview "File->Thumbnails->Options->Select
    > All" and then press "File->JPEG Lossless Operations->Lossless Rotation With
    > Selected Files->Auto Rotate (according to Exif orientation, if
    > available)->Optimize JPG File->Apply original Exif date/time to new
    > file->Keep all APP markers (default)".
    >
    > 3. Every time I do this, only the first hundred or two hundred pictures are
    > rotated; the rest seem to not be touched. If I select a hundred pictures at
    > a time (slow at best in the Irfanview thumbnail viewer), then, over
    > successive operations, I can manage to auto-rotate the entire set.
    >
    > This looks/smells/tastes either like user error (but where?) or a
    > previously unknown bug in Irfanview.
    >
    > Can another confirm that Irfanview batch lossless autorotation by Exif tags
    > fails to run on all selected files for large numbers of files?


    Have you emailed Irfan about this? In my experience, he's very
    responsive to questions and bug reports (as much as his schedule allows
    him to be, anyway).
    Matt Ion, Jul 18, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Susan

    Steve Guest

    On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 23:11:43 -0700, Matt Ion <>
    wrote:

    >Susan wrote:
    >> Can you reproduce this WinXP Irfanview v4.10 bug?
    >>
    >> 1. Start with a large directory of JPEG files (at least a few hundred
    >> pictures, say about 400 or 500 from a normal photo shoot). These must have
    >> a few files that are not rotated yet, but which have the proper Exif tags.
    >>
    >> 2. Select all 500 files with Irvanview "File->Thumbnails->Options->Select
    >> All" and then press "File->JPEG Lossless Operations->Lossless Rotation With
    >> Selected Files->Auto Rotate (according to Exif orientation, if
    >> available)->Optimize JPG File->Apply original Exif date/time to new
    >> file->Keep all APP markers (default)".
    >>
    >> 3. Every time I do this, only the first hundred or two hundred pictures are
    >> rotated; the rest seem to not be touched. If I select a hundred pictures at
    >> a time (slow at best in the Irfanview thumbnail viewer), then, over
    >> successive operations, I can manage to auto-rotate the entire set.
    >>
    >> This looks/smells/tastes either like user error (but where?) or a
    >> previously unknown bug in Irfanview.
    >>
    >> Can another confirm that Irfanview batch lossless autorotation by Exif tags
    >> fails to run on all selected files for large numbers of files?

    >
    >Have you emailed Irfan about this? In my experience, he's very
    >responsive to questions and bug reports (as much as his schedule allows
    >him to be, anyway).


    I have seen bugs similar to this with programs that use the MFC
    CFileDialog class.

    Steve
    Steve, Jul 18, 2008
    #3
  4. Susan

    Sachin Garg Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    >>Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.

    >
    > Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    > iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >
    >
    > http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001


    That is not a virus. Just an alert that the executable is 'compressed'. My
    opinion is that trendmicro should not have panicked in this case.

    Sachin Garg [India]
    www.sachingarg.com | www.imagecompression.info | www.rawzor.com
    Sachin Garg, Jul 18, 2008
    #4
  5. Susan

    hummingbird Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:39:20 -0400 ''
    wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:

    >>Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.

    >
    >Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >
    >
    >http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001


    And your evidence for this is.............?


    --
    "All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
    and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)
    hummingbird, Jul 18, 2008
    #5
  6. Sachin Garg wrote:

    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >>>Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.

    >>
    >> Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >> iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>
    >>
    >> http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001

    >
    > That is not a virus. Just an alert that the executable is 'compressed'. My
    > opinion is that trendmicro should not have panicked in this case.


    Great -- more FUD regarding a great piece of software (IrfanView). :(


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
    Blinky the Shark, Jul 18, 2008
    #6
  7. Susan

    Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:06:14 -0400, in rec.photo.digital
    wrote:


    >No. What it is saying is that this particular file is possibly
    >infected because it has characteristics that are suspicious.
    >It has yet to be determined by Trend Micro if it actually is a
    >virus.


    Then bozo why did you EXPLICITLY state the following?

    >Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    , Jul 18, 2008
    #7
  8. Susan

    Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:39:20 -0400, in rec.photo.digital
    wrote:

    >Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    , Jul 18, 2008
    #8
  9. Susan

    hummingbird Guest

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:12:04 -0400 ''
    wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:

    >On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:09:00 +0100, hummingbird
    ><hummingbird@127.0.0.1> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:39:20 -0400 ''
    >>wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:
    >>
    >>>>Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.
    >>>
    >>>Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >>>iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001

    >>
    >>And your evidence for this is.............?

    >
    >A Virus scanner, 2008 Trend Micro



    Well it's wrong. Run your IV v4.20 setup through jotti
    and it comes up fine and that webservice includes Trend Micro.


    --
    "All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
    and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)
    hummingbird, Jul 19, 2008
    #9
  10. tnom wrote:

    > On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:14:28 -0400, wrote:
    >
    >>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:06:14 -0400, in rec.photo.digital
    >>wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>No. What it is saying is that this particular file is possibly
    >>>infected because it has characteristics that are suspicious.
    >>>It has yet to be determined by Trend Micro if it actually is a
    >>>virus.

    >>
    >>Then bozo why did you EXPLICITLY state the following?
    >>
    >>>Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >>>iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus

    >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    > Because Trend Micro alerted me to a Virus and suggested to not
    > download the file.


    "Possibly infected" (your second explanation) is not the same as "contain
    the virus" (your first bit of FUD).


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
    Blinky the Shark, Jul 19, 2008
    #10
  11. tnom wrote:

    > On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:38:40 -0700, Blinky the Shark
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>tnom wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:14:28 -0400, wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:06:14 -0400, in rec.photo.digital
    >>>>wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>No. What it is saying is that this particular file is possibly
    >>>>>infected because it has characteristics that are suspicious.
    >>>>>It has yet to be determined by Trend Micro if it actually is a
    >>>>>virus.
    >>>>
    >>>>Then bozo why did you EXPLICITLY state the following?
    >>>>
    >>>>>Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >>>>>iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >>> Because Trend Micro alerted me to a Virus and suggested to not
    >>> download the file.

    >>
    >>"Possibly infected" (your second explanation) is not the same as "contain
    >>the virus" (your first bit of FUD).

    >
    > Maybe because Trend Micro upon download of Irfanview 4.2 reports
    > it AS A VIRUS which was reported in my first post. If you then follow
    > the link and read what the virus information is then you get a more
    > detailed explanation, which was my second post. My posts on this
    > subject are accurate, but if that upsets you then go ahead and ignore
    > the info.


    I neither have to follow it nor ignore it, in so far as I have no need to
    download and install IrfanView over my present copies of it. :) I just
    hate to see FUD (and urban legends) vectored.


    --
    Blinky
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
    Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
    Blinky the Shark, Jul 19, 2008
    #11
  12. Susan

    Sparky Guest

    Re: Irfanview freeware bug? Batch JPEG lossless autorotation. Largedirectory failure consistent

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: RIPEMD160

    Ron Hunter wrote:

    > wrote:
    >>> Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.

    >>
    >> Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >> iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>
    >>
    >> http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001

    >
    > A virus from Tucows, or Downloads.com? I seriously doubt this. Note
    > that I don't use their other mirrors.


    It certainly wouldn't be the first time actual malware had made its way
    past the quality control folks of a major shareware distributor. Or
    onto a popular shareware collection CD. Or for that matter, onto a
    spanking new hard drive right from the manufacturer.


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iEYEAREDAAYFAkiBbQAACgkQUZCI41IC43gsmgCghfX69Yfk1B/3BudUpGxR5//h
    MeEAn08DginqkoZdZGOX0n5kC785Tu7B
    =nUoW
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Sparky, Jul 19, 2008
    #12
  13. Susan

    Franklin Guest

    On Sat 19 Jul 2008 00:09:49, hummingbird wrote:

    >
    > On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:12:04 -0400 '' wrote this on
    > alt.comp.freeware:
    >
    >>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:09:00 +0100, hummingbird
    >><hummingbird@127.0.0.1> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:39:20 -0400 '' wrote this on
    >>>alt.comp.freeware:
    >>>
    >>>>>Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.
    >>>>
    >>>>Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >>>>iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?
    >>>>_Generic.001
    >>>
    >>>And your evidence for this is.............?

    >>
    >>A Virus scanner, 2008 Trend Micro

    >
    >
    > Well it's wrong. Run your IV v4.20 setup through jotti and it comes
    > up fine and that webservice includes Trend Micro.
    >
    >


    Did you perform the same check on your famous Pricelessware trojan
    after you had got it?
    Franklin, Jul 19, 2008
    #13
  14. Susan

    Craig Guest

    Re: Irfanview freeware bug? Batch JPEG lossless autorotation. Largedirectory failure consistent

    Sparky wrote:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: RIPEMD160
    >
    > Ron Hunter wrote:
    >
    >> wrote:
    >>>> Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.
    >>> Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >>> iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001

    >> A virus from Tucows, or Downloads.com? I seriously doubt this. Note
    >> that I don't use their other mirrors.

    >
    > It certainly wouldn't be the first time actual malware had made its way
    > past the quality control folks...onto a
    > spanking new hard drive...


    or NAS or flash drive or digital picture frame...

    > right from the manufacturer.


    Brave new world!

    -Craig
    Craig, Jul 19, 2008
    #14
  15. wrote:
    > On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:09:00 +0100, hummingbird
    > <hummingbird@127.0.0.1> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:39:20 -0400 ''
    >> wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:
    >>
    >>>> Don't know. I have replaced 4.1 with 4.2. Give it a try.
    >>>
    >>> Be careful. All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    >>> iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001

    >>
    >> And your evidence for this is.............?

    >
    > A Virus scanner, 2008 Trend Micro


    Sounds to be as bad as "Norman" for false alarms.

    David
    David J Taylor, Jul 19, 2008
    #15
  16. Susan <> wrote:

    >Can you reproduce this WinXP Irfanview v4.10 bug?
    >
    >1. Start with a large directory of JPEG files (at least a few hundred
    >pictures, say about 400 or 500 from a normal photo shoot). These must have
    >a few files that are not rotated yet, but which have the proper Exif tags.
    >
    >2. Select all 500 files with Irvanview "File->Thumbnails->Options->Select
    >All" and then press "File->JPEG Lossless Operations->Lossless Rotation With
    >Selected Files->Auto Rotate (according to Exif orientation, if
    >available)->Optimize JPG File->Apply original Exif date/time to new
    >file->Keep all APP markers (default)".
    >
    >3. Every time I do this, only the first hundred or two hundred pictures are
    >rotated; the rest seem to not be touched. If I select a hundred pictures at
    >a time (slow at best in the Irfanview thumbnail viewer), then, over
    >successive operations, I can manage to auto-rotate the entire set.
    >
    >This looks/smells/tastes either like user error (but where?) or a
    >previously unknown bug in Irfanview.
    >
    >Can another confirm that Irfanview batch lossless autorotation by Exif tags
    >fails to run on all selected files for large numbers of files?


    Susan,

    Not what you want to hear, but it seems to work OK for me.

    I couldn't find any not-yet-rotated ones so I took a couple of
    portrait photos, checked that they were indeed being shown with the
    'wrong' orientation, and added them to a collection of other old JPGs,
    making 544 in total. About 963 MB in total.

    IrfanView 4.10 performed the operation on all of them and the last two
    were now correctly displayed.

    Have you tried it with various alternative sets of JPGs? IOW, to see
    if you can get the process to work with any of them? Which would then
    perhaps implicate a file(s) in the set that's not working properly.

    Given that my folder worked OK, maybe you could simply make up a
    folder based on some of my files, just in case there's something weird
    happening with your own! You could use one or two of them and quickly
    double up repeatedly until you had 500+. If you want to try that let
    me know and I'll make up a small ZIP file and upload it.

    --
    Terry, East Grinstead, UK
    Terry Pinnell, Jul 19, 2008
    #16
  17. Susan

    hummingbird Guest

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:24:39 -0400 ''
    wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:

    >>>>And your evidence for this is.............?
    >>>
    >>>A Virus scanner, 2008 Trend Micro

    >>
    >>
    >>Well it's wrong. Run your IV v4.20 setup through jotti
    >>and it comes up fine and that webservice includes Trend Micro.

    >
    >Jotti does not include Trend Micro


    Sorry, my bad. Whatever, there are ~22 scanners at jotti, and
    my installer passed them all. It is not good practice to make the
    kind of unsubstantiated assertion that you made which can easily
    spread across the Internet and have serious effects on the author
    of such a program. By your (later) admission the Trend flag was
    not a statement of fact, but a warning (almost certainly false).

    But that is not how you presented it.
    Careful choice of words is everything in such matters.

    Many folks on <alt.comp.freeware> try to encourage freeware
    authors, not slag down their products.

    -my 2cents worth-

    HTH and HAND


    --
    "All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
    and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)
    hummingbird, Jul 19, 2008
    #17
  18. Susan

    hummingbird Guest

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:09:33 -0400 ''
    wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:

    >>Sorry, my bad. Whatever, there are ~22 scanners at jotti, and
    >>my installer passed them all. It is not good practice to make the
    >>kind of unsubstantiated assertion that you made which can easily
    >>spread across the Internet and have serious effects on the author
    >>of such a program. By your (later) admission the Trend flag was
    >>not a statement of fact, but a warning (almost certainly false).



    >Unsubstantiated?


    Yep.

    >Check this out............
    >The file could not be downloaded to completion without turning the
    >virus scanner off. Now tell me how this isn't presented as a virus per
    >Trend Micro.


    Here's your corrected comments *after* you made an
    unsubstantiated categoric assertion against the IV setup program:

    "What it is saying is that this particular file is possibly
    infected because it has characteristics that are suspicious.
    It has yet to be determined by Trend Micro if it actually
    is a virus."

    May I point out that "possibly infected" and "it has
    characteristics that are suspicious" is not the same as
    you said originally:

    "All links from the Irfanview site that direct you to
    iview42_setup.exe, (version 4.2) contain this virus

    http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=PAK_Generic.001"


    None of that is evidence of malware in the Irfanview setup
    program. Like I said previously, it has been scanned by ~22 jotti
    scanners and already installed by a large number of people here
    on ACF (incl myself) + elsewhere, all without any problem reports.

    Given all that, where do *you* think the problem lies???

    Thus, my comments about being careful when slagging down
    a hugely popular FREEWARE program stand.


    >The second post was the picky details that you would only gain if you
    >went online to look up the particular virus.



    --
    "All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
    and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)
    hummingbird, Jul 19, 2008
    #18
  19. Susan

    hummingbird Guest

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:37:35 -0400 ''
    wrote this on alt.comp.freeware:

    >>Given all that, where do *you* think the problem lies???


    Your lack of answer to this question is noted.

    >>Thus, my comments about being careful when slagging down
    >>a hugely popular FREEWARE program stand.



    >The fact remains...


    The only facts remaining are that you made a very unfair and
    factually incorrect statement about a hugely popular FREEWARE
    program.

    I am fully prepared to accept that you did so unintentionally.
    Perhaps you would have the courtesy of confirming that.


    --big snip--


    --
    "All truth passes through three stages.
    First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed,
    and third, it is accepted as self-evident"
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)
    hummingbird, Jul 19, 2008
    #19
  20. Susan

    Bert Hyman Guest

    In news: Ron Hunter
    <> wrote:

    > My only complaint about the file is that it offers to load Google
    > Toolbar and Google Desktop, neither of which I want on my computer.


    An offer that's easy to refuse, but possibly provides the developer of a
    very fine program a few cents per download.

    --
    Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN
    Bert Hyman, Jul 19, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Joy
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    817
    Sachin Garg
    May 23, 2007
  2. pierre lemercier

    lossless batch processing of jpeg pictures (os x)

    pierre lemercier, Mar 26, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    489
    Paul Allen
    Mar 28, 2008
  3. nick c

    Re: JPEG 9 new lossless JPEG standard

    nick c, Jan 22, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    159
    nick c
    Jan 22, 2013
  4. David Dyer-Bennet

    Re: JPEG 9 new lossless JPEG standard

    David Dyer-Bennet, Jan 23, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    146
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Jan 23, 2013
  5. Martin Brown

    Re: JPEG 9 new lossless JPEG standard

    Martin Brown, Jan 23, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    469
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Feb 13, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page