A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Photo editor



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old January 3rd 19, 12:41 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
David B.[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 286
Default [OT]Photo editor

On 02/01/2019 23:33, Mayayana wrote:
"Shadow" wrote

| What the heck does that mean? The entire webpage is script.
| It links to several external scripts. There's no way to know
| what happens from there. It probably links to external trackers
| and ads once the script runs. One of the biggest malware risks
| these days is from malware makers who buy ad space to get
| into your browser.
|
| He didn't read your post.
|

No, he talks nonsense. But sometimes I figure
it's worth explaining details, lest someone with
little expertise thinks he knows what he's talking
about.


THIS is where you mentioned a carpenter!



Mind you, in another post you state "I'm a contractor
who also does web design and writes Windows software."

It's no wonder I get confused! ;-)

--
David B.
Ads
  #62  
Old January 3rd 19, 12:48 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
David B.[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 286
Default [OT]Photo editor

On 03/01/2019 00:19, nospam wrote:
In article , David B.
wrote:

On 02/01/2019 20:41, Mayayana wrote:
...


I'm fairly sure I read yesterday that YOU are a .... carpenter?


he's related to karen.


For any youngsters here! ;-)

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/m...-house-122684/

--
David B.
  #63  
Old January 3rd 19, 10:33 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
Andy Burns[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 971
Default [OT]Photo editor

David B. wrote:

I enjoyed exploring your website, Andy.


No upcoming "bargains" from ScrewFix take your fancy?
  #64  
Old January 3rd 19, 11:12 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
wasbit[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 156
Default [OT]Photo editor

"Mayayana" wrote in message
...
"David B." "David wrote

| There are only three javascripts listed on 'wasbit's' website.
|

What the heck does that mean? The entire webpage is script.
It links to several external scripts. There's no way to know
what happens from there. It probably links to external trackers
and ads once the script runs. One of the biggest malware risks
these days is from malware makers who buy ad space to get
into your browser.

*The entire page is nothing but script, except for the warning
that says the page won't work without script.* That's not
exaggeration. There's actually no content in that webpage.
It's just an unknown software program that will do unknown
things and share your data with unknown others if you let
the script run.

"I'm not worried", said Private Swifty. "There are only 2
machine guns and a flamethrower aimed at me. How much
harm can they do?" With that, he stepped out of the bunker.

There's no reason that anyone should routinely have to
enable script just to download files or read text. If you
want to do online banking or buy stuff then, yes, it requires
script.

The Box, inc. privacy policy pretty says they'll spy on you
any way they can. They'll collect your social media info if
you give them a chance. The don't respect Do Not Track.
They do use Flash cookies. It also mentions Google adsense.
Since there are no ads evident in the original page script it
has to be assumed that the page script then calls in
numerous other scripts when it loads.
(The privacy policy is readable without script by disabling
CSS. But they do try to block that functionality. In other
words, they've specifically tried to break a palin text webpage
so that you can't read it unless you let them run scripts.
Nice people, huh?.)
That privacy policy page calls in Google, Adobe, optimizely.com,
truste (the people who pretend to protect privacy online
with impressive gold medallions that look like Good
Housekeeping seals), as well as two new entries for my
HOSTS file domain blocking:

marketo.net and nr-data.net

Why should anyone put up with such risks and intrusions
just to download a file? There are clean hosting sites. And
for anyone just arriving from 1980, they should know that
they can have their own domain and web space for a very
small cost. They don't need to use sleazy, spyware, web
services.



Perhaps you could suggest somewhere free that will host these text files.

--
Regards
wasbit

  #65  
Old January 3rd 19, 12:16 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
wasbit[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 156
Default Photo editor

"Shadow" wrote in message
...

Not trying to be in competition with another poster in this thread .......

My freeware photo/image lists:

Photo/Image 2 Convert/Edit (approx 400)
Photo/Image 3 Resize, Thumbnails (approx 200)
Photo/Image 4 Viewer, Album, Manage (approx 200)
1 Various
5 Colour ;
6 Exif/Tag ;
7 File Specific
Photo Manipulation

Over 200 lists of freeware. Yours to do with as you wish
- http://www.box.net/wasbitlists


I was going to recommend your lists ( bookmarked) but the host
seems to be blocking various privacy protections.
I remember that in the olde days you had an alternate site
with a link to a zip of all your files.
Can't remember where it was.
Is it gone ?
TIA


The alternative was Google Docs.
Unfortunately Google kept changing the rules then one day the hosting page
disappeared so I didn't bother to reinstate it.

The zip file of lists is in the files folder
- http://www.box.net/wasbitlists

--
Regards
wasbit

  #66  
Old January 3rd 19, 01:47 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
Shadow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,386
Default [OT]Photo editor

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 11:12:56 -0000, "wasbit"
wrote:


Perhaps you could suggest somewhere free that will host these text files.


Sendspace will allow you to upload the zip file. You need to
enable scripts to upload, but NOT to download.

But unless you register an account, the file stays there for
only 30 days. I suppose it depends on how often you update the zip.

https://nofile.io/ used to work without scripting, but I just
tried it and it appears to be malfunctioning. It says my file was
uploaded, but can't find it when I use the URL they gave me.
Oh, and it's working again

https://nofile.io/f/tkdJZNGaf0F/OMG_IT_WORKS.txt

Appears to expire after 30 days or so.

https://paste.ee/ works fine for texts files, and has a
"forever option" but it would be a PITA to upload all your lists
individually.
HTH (I'm sure there are other options out there. My favorite
http://www.pastie.org/ appears to have been abandoned)
[]'s

--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
  #67  
Old January 3rd 19, 02:03 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,542
Default [OT]Photo editor

"wasbit" wrote

| Perhaps you could suggest somewhere free that will host these text files.
|
People who use those sites will know better than
I do, but I do keep a list of sites where I can get
files without trouble and sites where I can't. I'd
also be curious to see other lists, if you keep lists
for different categories of software.

My list of sites, though some are probably only for images:

--------------------------------
Sites that are broken:

Images:
photobucket.com
tinypic.com
flickr.com

Files:
Google docs
box.net
---------------------------------
Sites that work:

Images:
imgur
postimg.org
pictr.com
uploads.im

Files:
fileconvoy.com
-----------------------------

Special case: Dropbox. Dropbox is a unique case
that I don't entirely understand. Unfortunately, most
people who use it also don't understand. It seems
that one needs to read detailed instructions to figure
out their options.

Sometimes someone sends a link to a folder and
there seems to be no way to access it without joining
somehow. Other times people link to dropboxusercontent
and I can easily download the file. A third case is that
they link to dropbox and the URL ends with "dl=0". If
I change the 0 to 1 then putting the URL into my browser
will give me a download dialogue.

OneDrive: I've only needed to deal with OneDrive once
or twice. There don't seem to be many people using it.
I discovered a trick for that:

OneDrive download:

Enter file link.
Block redirect.
In resulting redirect link in address bar, repalce redir with download.
Run that link.

I block redirects normally, so this is easy for me. Other
people would need to adjust browser settings.

A list of easy, simple file hosters might be handy, if
someone has such a list. But I don't know how realistic
it is. If sites don't charge and can't show ads, how will
they make a living?

Having your own webhost, or paying for file storage
space, would be the clean way to host files. But that
also gets complicated. You have to know about webpage
coding or, at the very least, how to upload files via
FTP to your site, if you get a domain and website. And a
lot of webhosting is cheapo, with strict limits on file
downloads, and ads on pages. The cheapo sites don't
expect you to really use the resources.

I don't know about paid storage deals.

But we can't really expect companies to be honest
and non-sleazy when their only business model is to
squeeze profit from people who refuse to pay for the
service.
It seems that nearly everyone has acclimated to the
idea that everything should be free and easy. As a
result, we've acclimated to having sleazy companies own
our stuff. Facebook even owns peoples' social lives. But
how many would pay for a legitimate social site? Especially
when they already think their social lives belong to
Facebook, tolerating Facebook and advertisers changing
their posts, inserting ads, and deciding which posts they'll
see from others.

I once spent an afternoon with an acquaintance who
does tech support for a living. He uses a gmail address
and milks dropbox for all it's worth, storing his work files,
like bootable repair disk ISOs, on dropbox. He sets up
his customers the same way. He's training people to
disregard honesty and privacy, and to join the online
melee where we all try to grab a freebie from the snake
oil salesman before he can pick our pocket.
When I asked him about giving people options he got
mad and said a tech support person has no business telling
people how to use their computer. Just so. He had no idea
that he was doing just that. It had never occurred to him
that there was any way to operate other than using freebie,
spyware email and avoiding payment for dropbox's services.


  #68  
Old January 3rd 19, 03:29 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
David B.[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 286
Default [OT]Photo editor

On 03/01/2019 10:33, Andy Burns wrote:
David B. wrote:

I enjoyed exploring your website, Andy.


No upcoming "bargains" from ScrewFix take your fancy?


No, not really, although I did have a quick look.

If there's something which I *NEED* I'll buy it, regardless of special
prices.

--
David B.
  #69  
Old January 3rd 19, 03:35 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
JBI
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default Photo editor

On 12/31/18 9:13 AM, Mayayana wrote:
The question of photo editors comes up often. I don't
remember whether this one ever got mentioned. I came
across the code awhile back. It's written in VB6. The
code is freely available. The program seems to work nicely
and does much of what a full editor can do, including
"effects" plugins. Yet it's only 52 MB installed.

Disadvantages:

* No help file.

* A curious oversight in terms of functionality. There's
no line or shape tool! (At least I can't find them.)

* A kiddie-style, Metro-esque UI that takes up too much
space.

But it has a full stock of filters, color adjustment, layer
functionality, etc. There's not much missing that you'd get
in Photoshop for a very steep price, in a spyware package,
with a rental model, and a wildly bloated installation.

The lack of line and shape tools is odd. I use those regularly
and in terms of code they're much easier than creating
effects like "oil painting" or "windblown". But for someone who
only wants to work on photos without doing graphics, Photo
Demon looks like a very good choice.

https://photodemon.org/



I had run Photoshop almost exclusively as a "trial" for at least two
years up until a year ago. By "trial", I really mean that. I had hard
drives set up so that, after the 30 days and existing trial was over, I
could swap hard drives with one that never had PS installed, reinstall
it, and start over. This got really tiresome and I didn't use the
program everyday, so I switched to Affinity Photo and GIMP as secondary.

Affinity was the closest Photoshop competitor that I could find that
offered functionality as close as possible to Photoshop. It still lacks
some features, but the developers run a forum and are very responsive to
suggestions and bug reports. That being said, it still seems to have
stability problems and, from my research and experience, most of the
issues happen with older computers (not enough ram or fast enough CPU,
etc). I myself continue to have issues with random crashes, screen
black outs and such, but getting the program during one of the sales for
$35 was no issue for me. I refuse to go with Photoshop's subscription
model. I think the most significant difference between Affinity and
Photoshop though is that the former offers far more functionality in 32
bit mode than the latter! This can make a surprising difference in
processing outcomes (32 versus 16 bit processing).

GIMP is my standby. I try to use the features it has to substitute for
missing Affinity functions that Photoshop had. I recently had to do
content aware scaling on a photo that could benefit from it. Since
Affinity lacks such a feature, I was able to find it in GIMP with one of
the plug-ins (liquid rescale). So, in that case, while Affinity did
most of the heavy work in processing, GIMP saved the day. I have had no
crashes with GIMP, unlike with Affinity, but it's format still isn't
quite what either Affinity or Photoshop offers, so it remains a standby.

  #70  
Old January 3rd 19, 05:17 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,472
Default Photo editor

JBI wrote:

Affinity was the closest Photoshop competitor that I could find that
offered functionality as close as possible to Photoshop. It still lacks
some features, but the developers run a forum and are very responsive to
suggestions and bug reports. That being said, it still seems to have
stability problems and, from my research and experience, most of the
issues happen with older computers (not enough ram or fast enough CPU,
etc).


Is there any way to switch over to WARP from GPU acceleration ?

The Mac version of Affinity has the ability to disable GPU
acceleration, while the Windows one doesn't. To switch to
WARP (a software fallback available in an SDK) would be less
painful if it was supported right in the program itself.

"Windows Advanced Rasterization Platform"
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/win...ow-to-use-warp

Windows has DirectX and OpenGL (or Vulkan) support,
and WARP is a software method of doing the DirectX
features without a fancy GPU.

Programs can also have their own software fallback
paths, so they don't absolutely have to use WARP.
There are other ways to do it. In the same sense
as Linux has MESA3D for emulation, versus a
proprietary stack that comes with an NVidia or
AMD hardware driver.

The folks at Adobe have been doing hardware acceleration
for more than 20 years, and are old hands at switching
between acceleration devices. At one time, you could
buy a small plugin card with a dual DSP running at 50MHz
and that used to accelerate some Photoshop plugins.
I don't know of any other similar efforts before
Adobe tried this. Whereas there's a lot more hardware
acceleration today because of CUDA and OpenCL type stuff.
The only real problem with hardware acceleration, is the
lack of programmers in the general population familiar
with it.

And as with any Windows topic like this, you will waste
at least half the day triangulating "which SDK do I want" :-/
That's the part of these experiments I hate, is downloading
a 2GB file, only to discover the 50KB thing I wanted from
the 2GB file, isn't in there. And some discussion thread
will suggest a different file, I download it... and same story.
That's one of the reasons I'm not rushing off to find it.
Been there... and bought the wrong Tshirt.

Paul
  #71  
Old January 3rd 19, 05:31 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
JBI
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 76
Default Photo editor

On 1/3/19 12:17 PM, Paul wrote:
JBI wrote:

Affinity was the closest Photoshop competitor that I could find that
offered functionality as close as possible to Photoshop.* It still
lacks some features, but the developers run a forum and are very
responsive to suggestions and bug reports.* That being said, it still
seems to have stability problems and, from my research and experience,
most of the issues happen with older computers (not enough ram or fast
enough CPU, etc).


Is there any way to switch over to WARP from GPU acceleration ?


Yes, in Windows, one can switch to WARP as well, which I did some weeks
ago. Since doing so, I haven't seen the black screening issue, but I
still have occasional random crashes or slowing/ freezing of the program
after long term usage. Much of the time, the recovery file created
restores most or all of the work before the crash. I can work this way
until maybe getting a better system. Right now, I just can't afford it.

Thanks for the info link on WARP as I wasn't sure what it was.
  #72  
Old January 4th 19, 06:54 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,674
Default file hosting (was: [OT]Photo editor)

In message , Mayayana
writes:
"wasbit" wrote

| Perhaps you could suggest somewhere free that will host these text files.
|
People who use those sites will know better than
I do, but I do keep a list of sites where I can get
files without trouble and sites where I can't. I'd
also be curious to see other lists, if you keep lists
for different categories of software.

My list of sites, though some are probably only for images:

--------------------------------
Sites that are broken:

Images:
photobucket.com
tinypic.com
flickr.com

Files:
Google docs
box.net
---------------------------------
Sites that work:

Images:
imgur
postimg.org
pictr.com
uploads.im

Files:
fileconvoy.com
-----------------------------

Thanks for those lists again.
[]
Having your own webhost, or paying for file storage
space, would be the clean way to host files. But that
also gets complicated. You have to know about webpage
coding or, at the very least, how to upload files via
FTP to your site, if you get a domain and website. And a
lot of webhosting is cheapo, with strict limits on file
downloads, and ads on pages. The cheapo sites don't
expect you to really use the resources.


I'd say learning to use an FTP client isn't _that_ much more onerous
than learning to use some of the third-party hosting sites (especially
if you include the user experience), but I accept that some's MMV.

I don't know about paid storage deals.


Well, mine is probably what you mean by webhosting rather than paid
storage - it costs me twentysomething pounds a year for registration and
service. I'm aware I could be liable for DOS attacks, but so far I've
found it a lot easier to, say, upload a screenshot of something we're
discussing and then post a URL like
http://255soft.uk/temp/Clipboard02.jpg than inflict something like
flickr on people. No ad.s are involved, and so far no DOS. I don't
store/share ISOs or movies, or anything of that sort of size.

But we can't really expect companies to be honest
and non-sleazy when their only business model is to
squeeze profit from people who refuse to pay for the
service.


Indeed.
[]
When I asked him about giving people options he got
mad and said a tech support person has no business telling
people how to use their computer. Just so. He had no idea
that he was doing just that. It had never occurred to him


Yes, "giving people options" is the _opposite_ of "telling people how to
use their computer"!

that there was any way to operate other than using freebie,
spyware email and avoiding payment for dropbox's services.


--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Enjoy life now - it has an expiration date
  #73  
Old January 4th 19, 11:09 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
wasbit[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 156
Default [OT]Photo editor

"Mayayana" wrote in message
...
"wasbit" wrote

| Perhaps you could suggest somewhere free that will host these text
files.
|
--------------------------------
Sites that work:

Images:
imgur
postimg.org
pictr.com
uploads.im

Files:
fileconvoy.com
-----------------------------


Tried fileconvoy.
Can only upload 10 files at a time & they are hosted for a maximum of 21
days.

--
Regards
wasbit


  #74  
Old January 4th 19, 12:26 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,472
Default [OT]Photo editor

wasbit wrote:
"Mayayana" wrote in message
...
"wasbit" wrote

| Perhaps you could suggest somewhere free that will host these text
files.
|
--------------------------------
Sites that work:

Images:
imgur
postimg.org
pictr.com
uploads.im

Files:
fileconvoy.com
-----------------------------


Tried fileconvoy.
Can only upload 10 files at a time & they are hosted for a maximum of 21
days.


Pastebin can be used for text. 512KB limit per file.
Can be set for unlimited retention. At one time,
pastebin didn't have that sort of limit, but it's
run more like a business now. I don't know whether
pastebin is all jazzed up with script or not - it's
been a while since I used it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastebin.com

For each uploaded file, you keep a URL around for
future reference.

Paul
  #75  
Old January 4th 19, 01:29 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.windows7.general
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,542
Default file hosting (was: [OT]Photo editor)

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| I'd say learning to use an FTP client isn't _that_ much more onerous
| than learning to use some of the third-party hosting sites (especially
| if you include the user experience), but I accept that some's MMV.
|

I don't think it's difficult or complicated to have
a website, but as with a lot of tech, it's hard to
find the information and put it all together.

The engineers give you unreadable RFC files. The
marketers speak in gibberish, going on about leveraging
cutting edge solutions across the enterprise. And the
tech support people dumb it down to the point of
uselessness.

It's easy to use an FTP program, but before you get
to that point you have to have a grasp of http,
explorer-style interfaces, website server file layout,
domain name buying, owning and registration, HTML,
and TCP-IP. Most people have no idea how a website
shows up in a browser window, and no part of that
process is self-evident.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.