@Traumflug said in ImageMagick image processor - what are the optimal settings?:
Nice to have such a module! Maybe it should even become part of the standard image handling page. Still I wonder a bit why there's an "original copy" switch. Hard to imagine a reason to not keep the original unless one never again wants to regenerate thumbnails. Same for the "progessive" switch: there's AFAIK no point in having non-progressive JPEGs.
Each switch, choice, checkbox comes at a cost:
Every user has to learn about the "better" position of that switch/choice/checkbox. This is time consuming and if the outcome of that learning is the same for virtually all shop operators, a waste of efforts.
More options require more code, so more chances for bugs, additional code maintenance burden, larger memory footprint, etc.
My $0.02
@Traumflug I totally agree with your whole 2 cents! I came running over here (and am still out of breath) as soon as I saw those ImageMagick choices.
What person besides a graphics designer (possibly) would know what lanczos & the other "resize filter types" are? The only filter I heard of is Gaussian but would have to Google it to know what it is and what it does.
I have no idea what "PNG data encoding filter", progressive jpegs, blur, fuzz, etc (you get the 'picture'. pun intended!) are used for.
Of all the settings, the only ones that make sense to me are "turn on" ImageMagick and keep original images known as "Original copy", which is an oxymoron, but ...
@roband7 - agreed!