0.88: Batch-Convert - Guetzli JPEG not working

[m.Th.]

If I have Guetzli JPEG as output format in Batch-Convert, the conversion time increases considerably (compared with the normal JPEG) but in the destination folder doesn't appear anything.

Tested with

DCT Method: Slow, Fast
Rebuild Embedded Thumbnail: Yes, No.
Quality: 60,80
Source file format: JPG, CR2 (Embedded Preview as Read Settings)

[masterjp]

The Guetzli JPEG Format needs much time (sometimes minutes or hours) for saving a big source file from a digital camera.
I think you have a Canon DSLR or compact camera with RAW support.

[cday]

The Guetzli JPEG Format needs much time (sometimes minutes or hours) for saving a big source file from a digital camera.
I think you have a Canon DSLR or compact camera with RAW support.

From what I recall, Guetzli was designed by Google primarily to compress web images which will normally be relatively small: I don't think it was ever intended for compressing larger files, and there have been reports that when used on larger files the percentage size reductions obtained are lower, and processing can indeed become extremely slow...

[m.Th.]

Yeah, ok - thanks for the confirmation WRT time but the bug resides not so much in the time spent, even if, of course it is a problem. It is that NO output file is produced. Can someone confirm?

I think you have a Canon DSLR or compact camera with RAW support.

Sure.

Only in this way I can produce .CR2 files.

The files are @ 20 - 22.6 MPix depending on camera (1DXmk2 or 5Dmk3 respectively) weighting @ 23-29 MB (of course JPEGs are smaller).

[cday]

Yeah, ok - thanks for the confirmation WRT time but the bug resides not so much in the time spent, even if, of course it is a problem. It is that NO output file is produced. Can someone confirm?

Never?

Could you test with smaller [progressively larger...] files to see how processing time scales with file size?

I think you have a Canon DSLR or compact camera with RAW support.

Sure.

Only in this way I can produce .CR2 files.

The files are @ 20 - 22.6 MPix depending on camera (1DXmk2 or 5Dmk3 respectively) weighting @ 23-29 MB (of course JPEGs are smaller).

[m.Th.]

Never?

Never.

Tested with 17 KBytes JPEG (643x544 pixels). NO output is produced. It is working for you?

[cday]

Never?

Never.

Tested with 17 KBytes JPEG (643x544 pixels). NO output is produced. It is working for you?

I hadn't tried: the idea of smaller 24-bit image files with the same quality is attractive for scanning magazines or books, but if for those image dimensions there is little gain in file size, and processing time can as reported become very long, there is no obvious avantage to using Guetzli at present.

I have tested now using 0.89 beta 1 File > Save as... rather than Batch convert, and also reread your original post, and can report that with my small test file (500px x 500px) processing seems to progress normally and complets quickly, but as you reported originally no file is output ...

[xnview]

the picture is in RGB?

[cday]

the picture is in RGB?

Yes: I don't have the original image on my laptop I use when away from home, but looking at how I created the image almost certainly yes.

[xnview]

the picture is in RGB?

Yes: I don't have the original image on my laptop I use when away from home, but looking at how I created the image almost certainly yes.

guetzli only support RGB

[m.Th.]

the picture is in RGB?

Yes: I don't have the original image on my laptop I use when away from home, but looking at how I created the image almost certainly yes.

guetzli only support RGB

RGB here.

[xnview]

RGB here.

could you send me your file?

[m.Th.]

RGB here.

could you send me your file?

??? Any JPEG will do, at least for me...

For conformity here you go:

[xnview]

it works for me in batch convert

[cday]

it works for me in batch convert

My test was using Viewer | File > Save as...

I have tested now using 0.89 beta 1 File > Save as... rather than Batch convert and can report that with my small test file (500px x 500px) processing seems to progress normally and completes quickly, but as you reported originally no file is output ...