Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Doesn't preserve EXIF-orientation on crop/resize. #45

Open
jensscherbl opened this issue Oct 31, 2012 · 7 comments
Open

Doesn't preserve EXIF-orientation on crop/resize. #45

jensscherbl opened this issue Oct 31, 2012 · 7 comments
Labels

Comments

@jensscherbl
Copy link
Member

It's basically all in the title. Will look into this and try to provide a fix...

@klaftertief
Copy link
Contributor

That's because GD strips out all image meta information. You'd have to read the metadata and re-insert it to the generated image or use imagemagick which supports metadata.
I have a JIT version where I hacked imagemagick into, if you are interested.

I'm not suggesting to replace GD with imagemagick, but JIT could support some delegates to replace the image library or to modify the image after processing. But this would bloat JIT quite a bit.

Am 31.10.2012 um 01:39 schrieb Jens Scherbl [email protected]:

It's basically all in the title. Will look into this and try to provide a fix...


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@jensscherbl
Copy link
Member Author

Already startet fixing it. Just reinserting the EXIF data wouldn't solve the problem, since not all browsers care about the EXIF orientation. So I'm checking the orientation on the server side and rotate the image accordingly before applying additional filters.

I'm not suggesting to replace GD with imagemagick

Why not? I read a lot about imagemagick being much more performant and easier to use. Needs to be implemented properly, though.

Relying on "hacked" code leads to situations like this, where I have to fix the system first instead of working with a reliable system on my client project (really frustrating).

@klaftertief
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not suggesting to replace GD with imagemagick

Why not. I read a lot about imagemagick being much more performant and easier to use. Needs to be implemented properly, though.

It's not installed all the time.

    ☜ klaftertief ☞
    Webentwicklung
    Jonas Coch

Weißenburgstr. 8
50670 Köln
+49 (0)221 17061941
+49 (0)151 27528221

http://klaftertief.de
[email protected]

@jensscherbl
Copy link
Member Author

It's not installed all the time.

Simple solution. Don't bundle JIT with the core (but treat it as a high priority extensions in terms of testing and development) and require imagemagick. Symphony is a professional tool, not for the masses, and good hosting providers have imagemagick already enabled or will enable it if you need it.

@jensscherbl
Copy link
Member Author

Just to make things clear in this context, my changes are still GD based. Would be nice if you could have a look and try it out. See links for background information and sample images.

@michael-e
Copy link
Member

This should be discussed in more detail. See forum.

@jensscherbl
Copy link
Member Author

No problem, tried to explain it in greater detail on the forum.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants