JPEG active content / resolution problem

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Steve Pope, Jul 30, 2006.

  1. Steve Pope

    Steve Pope Guest

    My apologies is this is a FAQ.

    I have a situation where JPEG files (back from a photofinisher)
    have (what I think may be) "active content" causing them to
    display at low resolution. If I view the files using an
    old enough browser (IE 5.0), they look fine; but when viewing with
    a modern browser the image loads, and then immediately switches
    to a smaller, lower-res display.

    Is there a way to filter such a file (say with a linux utility) and
    obtain a normal JPEG at full resolution?

    Thanks,

    Steve
     
    Steve Pope, Jul 30, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Steve Pope

    Bob Williams Guest

    Steve Pope wrote:

    > My apologies is this is a FAQ.
    >
    > I have a situation where JPEG files (back from a photofinisher)
    > have (what I think may be) "active content" causing them to
    > display at low resolution. If I view the files using an
    > old enough browser (IE 5.0), they look fine; but when viewing with
    > a modern browser the image loads, and then immediately switches
    > to a smaller, lower-res display.
    >
    > Is there a way to filter such a file (say with a linux utility) and
    > obtain a normal JPEG at full resolution?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Steve


    Does the small image display a hand or finger when you pass your cursor
    over it? If so, click the image again and it may display as a larger
    image........Bob Williams
     
    Bob Williams, Jul 30, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Steve Pope

    Guest

    Are you sure you haven't just got 'resize-images-to-fit-browser-window'
    turned on in your browser?

    Try viewing them in a real image browser, eg Irfanview.


    Steve Pope wrote:
    > My apologies is this is a FAQ.
    >
    > I have a situation where JPEG files (back from a photofinisher)
    > have (what I think may be) "active content" causing them to
    > display at low resolution. If I view the files using an
    > old enough browser (IE 5.0), they look fine; but when viewing with
    > a modern browser the image loads, and then immediately switches
    > to a smaller, lower-res display.
    >
    > Is there a way to filter such a file (say with a linux utility) and
    > obtain a normal JPEG at full resolution?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Steve
     
    , Jul 30, 2006
    #3
  4. Steve Pope

    Matt Ion Guest

    Steve Pope wrote:
    > My apologies is this is a FAQ.
    >
    > I have a situation where JPEG files (back from a photofinisher)
    > have (what I think may be) "active content" causing them to
    > display at low resolution. If I view the files using an
    > old enough browser (IE 5.0), they look fine; but when viewing with
    > a modern browser the image loads, and then immediately switches
    > to a smaller, lower-res display.
    >
    > Is there a way to filter such a file (say with a linux utility) and
    > obtain a normal JPEG at full resolution?


    That's a "feature" of most newer browsers, to resize large images to fit within
    the browser window. In IE6 and higher, if you put the pointer over the picture,
    in a couple seconds you'll get a little icon in the bottom-right that will
    expand the pic to full size when you click it.

    A better idea is to use a real photo viewer instead of a web browser. Download
    IrfanView (www.irfanview.com) and when installing, allow it to associate all
    image files with itself.
     
    Matt Ion, Jul 30, 2006
    #4
  5. Steve Pope

    Steve Pope Guest

    Thanks everyone for your advice -- in fact the browser was
    re-sizing the JPEG, and turning this feature off solved the
    immediate problem.

    A second, unrelated problem that was also confusing me is that
    the CD that comes back from the photofinisher actually has
    both high-res (~1.1 MB) and low-res (~60 kB) versions of the
    images in different directories; and the command for "copy all
    images to computer" in the Fujifilm software on the CD copies
    only the low-res images. I suppose their assumption is most
    people prefer the lower res images because they load quicker
    and save space.

    Steve
     
    Steve Pope, Jul 30, 2006
    #5
  6. Steve Pope

    Matt Ion Guest

    Steve Pope wrote:
    > Thanks everyone for your advice -- in fact the browser was
    > re-sizing the JPEG, and turning this feature off solved the
    > immediate problem.
    >
    > A second, unrelated problem that was also confusing me is that
    > the CD that comes back from the photofinisher actually has
    > both high-res (~1.1 MB) and low-res (~60 kB) versions of the
    > images in different directories; and the command for "copy all
    > images to computer" in the Fujifilm software on the CD copies
    > only the low-res images. I suppose their assumption is most
    > people prefer the lower res images because they load quicker
    > and save space.


    More likely it copies BOTH sets into the same folder - large ones first, then
    overwrites them with the small ones.
     
    Matt Ion, Jul 31, 2006
    #6
    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. =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Rafa=B3_=A3o=BFy=F1ski?=

    Thunderbird filters "active" but not "active"

    =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Rafa=B3_=A3o=BFy=F1ski?=, May 14, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    688
    Moz Champion
    May 18, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?U3VzaGls?=
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    732
    Wayne
    Feb 16, 2006
  3. speedbro

    Active content on Home Page

    speedbro, Apr 20, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    491
    Blinky the Shark
    Apr 21, 2005
  4. Mark  Phillips

    Blocked Content _this content not availabe at this time?

    Mark Phillips, Dec 10, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    462
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    Dec 11, 2006
  5. UBEST
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    24,595
    bmille6
    Mar 24, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page