H.S.([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said: > Olafur Jens Sigurdsson wrote: > > > Imagemagick does the trick for you. > > > > To see if your files are interlaced or not you can use identify > > -verbose filename.jpg and search for the Interlace line and if it says > > None then it isnt a progressive jpeg and if it says Plane it is. > > That was really great help. Thank a ton. The problem of identifying an > image as progressive or not is solved. > > > > > To convert from basic to progressive use convert infile.jpg -interlace > > Plane outfile.jpg > > The problem left is to convert all my current jpegs into progressive > ones. jpegtran did the job (the following is one long command): > $> for f in *.jpg; do echo "$f"; mv "$f" tmp.jpg; jpegtran -progressive > tmp.jpg > "$f"; rm -f tmp.jpg; done > > (I am sure there is a way to use the stdout and stdin in this procedure > instead of tmp.jpg, but I didn't check) H.S.
Having never heard of "a progressive jpeg" I was interested in your query, and the answer you received. I tried out the conversion to "progressive" on some of my large jpegs to see if it would help (as I have the same problem you have, dialup). I used the suggested convert command on a 77K jpeg and it was converted to 68K. Not bad but I have been using a different convert option and getting much better results. convert -quality 25 infile.jpg outfile That option got the 77K file down to 24K which is more manageable, for me anyway. I see no difference in the pictures but the size. I would be interested in hearing your results with this option. Wayne -- In a few minutes a computer can make a mistake so great that it would take many men many months to equal it. _______________________________________________________ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
