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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
I need to crop 50 Windows screen shots to the bottom left corner.
The initial screen shots were taken with Irfanview on Windows. I can't do them again as the conditions have changed. Is there an easy method to crop 50 images using the same dimensions? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
In article , George P
wrote: I need to crop 50 Windows screen shots to the bottom left corner. The initial screen shots were taken with Irfanview on Windows. I can't do them again as the conditions have changed. Is there an easy method to crop 50 images using the same dimensions? batch crop in lightroom. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
"George P" wrote
|I need to crop 50 Windows screen shots to the bottom left corner. | The initial screen shots were taken with Irfanview on Windows. | I can't do them again as the conditions have changed. | Is there an easy method to crop 50 images using the same dimensions? IrfanView can crop them if you give it a height or width, but if you have different sizes that might not work. www.jsware.net/jsware/pprep.php5 (Shareware but free with nag screen at start.) Open the options window and select a custom crop dimension, if necessary. Drop the folder of images onto the window. Check the option to crop. Select the orientation and ratio. Choose whether you want BMP result or JPG in a choice of resolutions. Process the images. Note that if you now have JPGs you're going to lose resolution each time you process them. Depending on what you need, and how much you're going to work on the images, you might want to save as BMP. You can then make a final save in JPG if you need small file size or PNG/TIF if you want a more compact file but don't want to sacrifice quality. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
In article , Mayayana
wrote: Note that if you now have JPGs you're going to lose resolution each time you process them. nope. what's lost is *quality*, not resolution, and with the highest quality jpeg, it's almost indistinguishable. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
George P wrote:
I need to crop 50 Windows screen shots to the bottom left corner. The initial screen shots were taken with Irfanview on Windows. I can't do them again as the conditions have changed. Is there an easy method to crop 50 images using the same dimensions? I just tried it with Irfan on 30 photos and it took less than one second. batch conversion / advanced / etc |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
George P wrote:
I need to crop 50 Windows screen shots to the bottom left corner. The initial screen shots were taken with Irfanview on Windows. I can't do them again as the conditions have changed. Is there an easy method to crop 50 images using the same dimensions? If the composition of the shot is not changing, then Irfanview itself has a batch processor with crop capability. if the crop target is moving, and you want to zoom into some moving portion of the tutorial, you'd need a different tool flow for that. I think some video editing tools have had "trajectory" capabilities, to follow moving stuff. But I've never needed such a thing. It's important to compose your tutorial shots, so that the post-editing will be easy. Once I start a tutorial, I try not to move the focus of the session around on the screen. ******* I would never printscreen 50 times. I use FFMPEG and the gdigrab screen recording capability, and record video as individual pictures ("A00001.jpg" "A00002.jpg"...). I've recorded as many as 60,000 images in a single folder, using FFMPEG for capture. Then, I use Avidemux 2.5 to walk through the video. I take the frame count off the bottom of the screen, then flip over to the folder of images and pull the corresponding A00xxx.jpg picture. In that way, I only have to "fish" for the exact images I want. Rather than processing 50 images and throwing away most of them, I have a tremendous trove of pictures, and the time I spend, is the time to locate each desired image after the tutorial is done. Maybe I only have to note the frame numbers of five frames, then go grab the like-named file from its folder for my uploads. Avidemux has a crop capability. You could crop the entire folder of images. I can even capture a few seconds worth and show an example. In a Command Prompt window... cd /d F:\TEMP2 # holds ffmpeg.exe and my images ffmpeg -framerate 1 -f gdigrab -i desktop -f image2 -q:v 1 -c:v mjpeg a%05d.jpg Press control-c to end capture. Then I can capture a particular frame later. I just made my meta tutorial. 1) setting the crop filter in Avidemux 2.5 crop-filter.gif https://i.postimg.cc/tg7RCwM2/crop-filter.gif 2) Use Avidemux to open the folder of jpegs. Set the Crop Filter. Save the entire bucket of frames as an AVI movie sequence. Open the AVI file again with avidemux. Save the (cropped) AVI as a sequence of individual frames again. In the example, I want the name to be a00xxx style, and I only have to type the letter "a" for the filename, as Avidemux will append the unique portion after that. select-jpeg-sequence-to-save.gif https://i.postimg.cc/VvPzg6LV/select...ce-to-save.gif 3) Now that I have my second folder of cropped JPGs, I can go back to reviewing the AVI movie (out.avi), frame by frame. Here, I think frame 11 captures my point well, so I note I need picture number 11 from the output folder preview-the-movie-look-for-candidates.gif https://i.postimg.cc/nrxt7P38/previe...candidates.gif 4) Here, I've double-clicked a0011.jpg in the crop output folder, and examine my handy work. It opens in Picture and Fax viewer. The image looks good, so I'm ready for upload (or something). verify-cropped-image-is-a-good-one.gif https://i.postimg.cc/L52rhZs2/verify...a-good-one.gif HTH, Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
On Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:43:58 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote I just tried it with Irfan on 30 photos and it took less than one second. batch conversion / advanced / etc This worked. I had used Irfanview before to take the screen shots but it was complicated to calculate the original x and y positions and width and length by hand. In this batch conversion / advanced / screen there was a lovely button named ^Get current sel.^ which ran the X/Y/Length/Width calculation for me from a sweep of the rectangular area of the largest needed area. I did not know of this automatic x/y/length/width calculator until now! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
Il giorno Tue 30 Oct 2018 02:06:52a, *George P* ha inviato su
alt.windows7.general il messaggio news cosa ha scritto: I just tried it with Irfan on 30 photos and it took less than one second. batch conversion / advanced / etc This worked. if you dare to try faststone, it has similar functions http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm -- /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\ -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=- http://www.bb2002.it ............ [ al lavoro ] ........... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
In message 12,
Ammammata writes: Il giorno Tue 30 Oct 2018 02:06:52a, *George P* ha inviato su alt.windows7.general il messaggio news cosa ha scritto: I just tried it with Irfan on 30 photos and it took less than one second. batch conversion / advanced / etc This worked. if you dare to try faststone, it has similar functions http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm Would you care to explain why you used the word "dare" (-:? I've now looked at it (well, the webpage - I've not installed it); from the list of features, it looks _very_ like IrfanView, with one exception for me: multilevel undo/redo. (Which is something IrfanView has lacked for some time: it has undo, but only one level.) I've downloaded it. Whether I ever get round to trying it, who knows (-: -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf No sense being pessimistic. It wouldn't work anyway. - Penny Mayes, UMRA, 2014-August |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
| I've now looked at it (well, the webpage - I've not installed it); from | the list of features, it looks _very_ like IrfanView, with one exception | for me: multilevel undo/redo. (Which is something IrfanView has lacked | for some time: it has undo, but only one level.) | I think this has been talked about before. Once you need multi-undo, you probably need an image editor and not a viewer. IV is a wonderful program that can do all sorts of things, but using it as an editor is a case of diminishing returns. The learning curve is somewhat extreme with graphic editors, so a lot of people prefer to try to stretch IV. IV will certainly stretch. But there's a limit. For editing there's GIMP, Paint.net, free older versions of PSP, reasonably priced current versions of PSP, and probably other good software. No one needs to try to shoehorn graphic editing into a viewer. Nor is it necessary to jump from viewer functionality to overpriced, limited Adobe products. In general it's not even necessary to spend money. Graphic operations, for the most part, are relatively simple and rely on old technology, so there's a lot of software around. George P has presented a good example of what IV is good for: He has 50 screenshots. He doesn't care what format they are. JPG? Then he's going to damage them, at least slightly, in the cropping and resaving. He doesn't care. He apparently has no plans to touch them up or try to improve them. He doesn't need good pictures. He just wants to quickly crop 50 low-grade images. That's a good job for IV. But if he wanted to do things like brighten, sharpen, crop intelligently, add text, paste in sections, etc then he'd be much better off with a full graphic editor rather than trying to do all that in IV. To my mind FastStone is a remnant of an earlier time. Like WinZip, it dates to a time 20 years ago when the functionality it provides wasn't available without paying a fairly high price. Windows could display a BMP, GIF, or JPG back then. That was about it. FastStone is free for home use, but that's a bit silly. They're trying to maintain an outdated business model. Like buying MS Office Home for $150 rather than using Libre Office. Even after paying $150, MS would be claiming I can't legally write a business letter, create a contract DOC, or design my own business cards with their software. FastStone is claiming I can only use their software to look at pictures and can't do anything that could somehow lkead to someone making money. Which means I couldn't even look at pictures if I were doing it at work. It's a ridiculous and even somewhat sleazy licensing limitation. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
In article , Mayayana
wrote: For editing there's GIMP, Paint.net, free older versions of PSP, reasonably priced current versions of PSP, and probably other good software. No one needs to try to shoehorn graphic editing into a viewer. Nor is it necessary to jump from viewer functionality to overpriced, limited Adobe products. except that they're not limited nor overpriced. in fact, they cost about the same as psp with similar functionality, but why let that detail get in the way of a rant. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
Il giorno Tue 30 Oct 2018 03:49:59p, *J. P. Gilliver (John)* ha inviato su
alt.windows7.general il messaggio . Vediamo cosa ha scritto: Would you care to explain why you used the word "dare" (-:? maybe George P "cares" about his computer and doesn't dare to install something new or maybe my English is slowly getting worse... -- /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\ -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=- http://www.bb2002.it ............ [ al lavoro ] ........... |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
In message , Mayayana
writes: [] I think this has been talked about before. Once you need multi-undo, you probably need an image editor and not a viewer. IV is a wonderful program that can do all sorts of things, but using it as an editor is a case of diminishing returns. I find it does virtually all I need to do. I'd need a very good reason to invest (and sorry to sound like "Arlen Holder" here, but "invest" includes learning time) in anything else. The learning curve is somewhat extreme with graphic editors, so a lot of people prefer to try to stretch IV. IV will certainly stretch. But there's a limit. For editing there's GIMP, Paint.net, free older versions of PSP, reasonably priced current versions of PSP, and probably other good software. No one needs to try to shoehorn graphic editing into a viewer. Nor is it necessary to But I, for one, am glad they have (-:! jump from viewer functionality to overpriced, limited Adobe products. In general it's not even necessary to I'd certainly agree with that. spend money. Graphic operations, for the most part, are relatively simple and rely on old technology, so there's a lot of software around. George P has presented a good example of what IV is good for: He has 50 screenshots. He doesn't care what format they are. JPG? Then he's going to damage them, at least slightly, in the cropping and resaving. He doesn't care. He apparently has no Not necessarily: "lossless JPEG crop" is possible. (Including in IrfanView; I don't know if just the basic IV or with the plugins, since I always install both anyway.) It is slightly restricted in that it limits the crop sizes (to a multiple of 16 pixels I think). plans to touch them up or try to improve them. He doesn't need good pictures. He just wants to quickly crop 50 low-grade images. That's a good job for IV. But if he wanted to do things like brighten, sharpen, crop intelligently, add text, paste in sections, etc then he'd be much better off with a full graphic editor rather than trying to do all that in IV. IV has a batch processing ability, which can do some of those things (not sure which; I think I've only ever used it to rename). Obviously if he wanted to do _different_ things to each image it'd be no use, the same applying to any batch processing anything else can offer too. To my mind FastStone is a remnant of an earlier time. Like WinZip, it dates to a time 20 years ago when the functionality it provides wasn't available without paying a fairly high price. Windows could display a BMP, GIF, or JPG back then. That was about it. Ignoring prejudices related to business models and general philosophy, are you saying the actual software is older or newer than IrfanView? [Or aren't you commenting on that, just having a rant (-:?] FastStone is free for home use, but that's a bit silly. But very common among software. They're trying to maintain an outdated business model. Like buying MS Office Home for $150 rather than using Libre Office. Even after paying $150, MS would be claiming I can't legally write a business letter, create a contract DOC, or design my own business cards with their software. FastStone is claiming I can only use their software to look at pictures and can't do anything that could somehow lkead to someone making money. Which means I couldn't even look at pictures if I were doing it at work. It's a ridiculous and even somewhat sleazy licensing limitation. Each to his own opinion! (I'm not disagreeing with any of the _facts_ you've stated: yes, in theory, those are all true.) Many years ago, I did actually buy IrfanView because I liked it and was using it a lot, and I also even bought it for my employer, so I could use it at work with no worry (I never actually told them I'd done so, or claimed the cost back). I think FastStone is significantly more expensive, though (though I've no idea what IV costs these days so may be wrong there). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf in the kingdom of the bland, the one idea is king. - Rory Bremner (on politics), RT 2015/1/31-2/6 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | I find it does virtually all I need to do. I'd need a very good reason | to invest (and sorry to sound like "Arlen Holder" here, but "invest" | includes learning time) in anything else. No argument here. Graphic editors are tremendously complex and take a long time to get the hang of. the better ones are very easy to use. | George P has presented a good example of what | IV is good for: He has 50 screenshots. He doesn't | care what format they are. JPG? Then he's going to | damage them, at least slightly, in the cropping and | resaving. He doesn't care. He apparently has no | | Not necessarily: "lossless JPEG crop" is possible. (Including in | IrfanView; I don't know if just the basic IV or with the plugins, since | I always install both anyway.) It is slightly restricted in that it | limits the crop sizes (to a multiple of 16 pixels I think). Yes. If you want to split hairs. But in general a JPG is lossy. It's already damaged in being a JPG. So there won't be many cases where a lossless JPG crop is relevant. false. It might look fine, but a lot of data has already been dumped out, even at top quality. (0 or 100 quality number, depending on which tool you use.) That's important when you're trying to do operations like saturation or brightness. Even in the best JPGs you'll see little rectangles (blended pixels) when you zoom in. false. subtract the highest quality jpeg from the original and you'll see there is *very* little difference. | IV has a batch processing ability, which can do some of those things | (not sure which; I think I've only ever used it to rename). Obviously if | he wanted to do _different_ things to each image it'd be no use, the | same applying to any batch processing anything else can offer too. Yes. Anything he's doing in batch mode is general, with no concern for quality. That's fine. There's a place for that. Like I said, that's what IV is great for. also false. batch mode does not affect quality. it just automates what would otherwise have been done one by one. Big changes happened as PCs matured. More good and free software destroyed the shareware market. It's not a matter of philosophy. It's just a matter of changes in the landscape. I was also affected by that change. Shareware doesn't sell anymore. People don't need to pay for the software they use. they do if they want quality. although there are exceptions, most free software is not particularly good. maybe that's why you are having difficulties figuring out how to use your graphic editor. There's very little software I've paid for. BootIt. Paint Shop Pro. Visual Studio 6. But even some versions of VS can be had for free these days in the form of "express" versions. Free and OSS products provide most of what most people need. the many billions of dollars spent for software say otherwise. (Thus, the cloud. If companies could keep selling new updates for the high prices they used to get then there would be no cloud. Cloud is just a land grab being marketed as futuristic technology.) false. Yes, indeed. If you go to the store and pay 10 times the going rate for a light bulb in order to be "licensed" to use it in a lamp at work, that's no skin off my back. And if you buy carrots at $10 or 5 pounds each for the company picnic.... that's your choice. But this licensing is a scam. I don't point it out because I like to rant. I point it out so that poor suckers like you or me don't end up being tricked into paying $10 for a carrot, or $500 for an office suite they don't need. Or $40 for an image viewer they don't need. too bad you don't understand what you claim to be pointing out. nobody is paying 10 times the going rate for anything. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
JPG/Mayayana "discussion" (was: Cropping 50 images to the same bottom left corner)
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | It might look fine, but a lot of data has already | been dumped out, even at top quality. (0 or 100 | quality number, depending on which tool you use.) | | [Does it have _no_ lossless compression setting?] No. If you try a small sample you can see it. I just tried it with a 30x90 button BMP that's a gradient image. Saving it as JPG and then zooming 15x shows an entirely different pattern of pixel colors. jpeg was designed for real world photos, not pixel peeping 30x90 pixel buttons with a gradient, and you probably didn't choose the highest quality either. An interesting aside to this: IBM just bought Red Hat. I think it was something like $15B. try again. it was $34b. https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/28/tech/ibm-red-hat/index.html |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|