ImageMagick image processor - what are the optimal settings?



  • what are the optimal settings for the ImageMagick image processor, please?
    Thank you @mdekker for creating it.
    0_1490887017766_imagemagick-settings-question.jpg


  • administrators

    It totally depends on your needs.
    Let the discussion begin!


  • Global Moderator

    I have around 5000 images of all sorts of origins, mostly from professional women’s fashion photographers, and I’m using these settings:
    Enable ImageMagick: Yes
    Use progressive JPEGs: Yes
    Strip image: Yes
    Resize filter type: Lanczos
    PNG data encoding filter: Adaptive
    Blur: 0.9
    Trim whitespace: Yes
    Fuzz: 10%
    Original copy: Yes



  • @roband7 Thank you very much! I updated my settings to match yours!



  • @mdekker said in ImageMagick image processor - what are the optimal settings?:

    It totally depends on your needs.
    Let the discussion begin!

    Yes, let’s! @roband7 seems to have the settings I need since I’m selling clothes (and jewelry, etc.)


  • Global Moderator

    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


  • Global Moderator

    @Traumflug This module was developed for PS 1.6 and just quickly moved over to thirty bees. I agree with your comments. I was in fact quite shocked when I discovered that PS didn’t keep the original image.


  • Global Moderator

    Good point, @roband7 :-)



  • @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!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to thirty bees forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.