0.84: Crop profiles problems

[phaolo]

XnView: MP 0.84 - 64 bit
OS: Windows 7 - 64bit

View mode, Editing, "Crop" profiles problems on images with height>width:
- ratios seems swapped. For example, 4:3 creates a 3:4 area.
- some pixel measures aren't applied correctly. For example, 720x1280px (9:16) has become 2276x1280px.

Effect: wrong images

To reproduce:
- open an image with height>width
- try the profiles O_o

Actual behaviour (bug): a wrong crop area

Expected behaviour: a defined crop area

[helmut]

Thank you for your bug report, phaolo. This problem might be related to problem 0.84: JPEG lossless cropping is completely off.
Could you please check with XnView 0.85 beta 2 whether your problem still occurs?

[phaolo]

Thank you for your bug report, phaolo. This problem might be related to problem 0.84: JPEG lossless cropping is completely off.
Could you please check with XnView 0.85 beta 2 whether your problem still occurs?

I'm not that sure, this problem appears before even cropping.
Also, please no betas, I hate them

[helmut]

Thank you for your bug report, phaolo. This problem might be related to problem 0.84: JPEG lossless cropping is completely off.
Could you please check with XnView 0.85 beta 2 whether your problem still occurs?

I'm not that sure, this problem appears before even cropping.

Sorry, I linked a related but wrong topic. Here's the correct link, http://newsgroup.xnview.com/viewtopic.php?t=33671

Also, please no betas, I hate them

O.k.. You can check once the 0.85 final is available.

[phaolo]

Mm.. this still happens in 0.85

[Erixx haxx]

Mm.. this still happens in 0.85

Confirmed, Happens here too, and it is related to the first bug. Maybe it didn't get fixed. I tried with 0.85-b-2 and same problem.
H x W Get Flipped sometimes with selection tool.

It seems dependent on exif info or something, because not all .jpg cause this.
I don't have time to track it down, but I think Xntriq had it figured out in the OEM post.


Thanks

[Erixx haxx]

Hi,

I found the OEM bug report where Xntriq better explains what might be going on.
Here:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=33671

It was in the fixed section,

[Note:]
I have 2 different pics, 1 works correct, the other has H x W flipped for selection or cropping in fullscreen.



Thanks

[xnview]

I found the OEM bug report where Xntriq better explains what might be going on.
Here:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=33671

but this problem is fixed

[Erixx haxx]

I found the OEM bug report where Xntriq better explains what might be going on.
Here:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=33671

but this problem is fixed

I'll see if I can get a sample pic for you to repo with.
Right now, all the pics i'm dealing with can not be sent.

@ phaolo do you happen to have a sample pic you can upload ??

Thanks

[Erixx haxx]

OK, Here's a test pic.

To repo:
Go to fullscreen
Select crop = 16 x 9
Now crop
Effect is Crop and/or selection is always flipped to 9 x 16

Crop_Test_AG.7z

(265.79 KiB) Downloaded 246 times

Note: Other files work correct for some reason.
Thanks

[helmut]

Thank you for providing a sample file, Erixx Haxx. I just tried to reproduce the problem using this sample file. When selecting ratio "16:9" the selection is 9:16. When cropping the cropped area matches the selection and is also 9:16.

Is this the behaviour you experience, Erixx Haxx? I think this behaviour is correct because the image has orientation "Portrait". The selection ratio specifies the ratio between <long side>:<short side> and for ease of use it automatically uses the orientation (landscape / portrait) of the image.

Note:
If you want to swap selection ratio you can press "W" key, click on "<>" in crop toolbar, or select "Edit > Selection - Swap width & height".

[Erixx haxx]

Hi, Thanks for the reply. I have 2 issues then.

**First**
This is really an annoying/unwanted action for me.
1.) When I select 16;9, means I need a 16:9 Crop.
2.) We already have a 9:16 option
3.) I'm cropping for monitor screens, not for picture frames
4.) I think the OP had the same complaint.
5.) This messes up Zoomed select also.

If we had an option like Fast Stone to "flip" or a way to turn this action on off would be much better.
I hope I don't have to keep hitting "W" key just for a "zoomed select"

**Second***
Not all pictures act this way. I have other Tall pic's that crop just fine. Same h x w, Also I have know way of knowing what way it will decide to select now.
Now I guess I need to find a sample where this action doesn't work.

[helmut]

Hi, Thanks for the reply. I have 2 issues then.

**First**
This is really an annoying/unwanted action for me.
1.) When I select 16;9, means I need a 16:9 Crop.
2.) We already have a 9:16 option
3.) I'm cropping for monitor screens, not for picture frames
4.) I think the OP had the same complaint.
5.) This messes up Zoomed select also.

If we had an option like Fast Stone to "flip" or a way to turn this action on off would be much better.
I hope I don't have to keep hitting "W" key just for a "zoomed select"

The use case that was discussed many years ago was cropping images from 3:2 to 4:3 ratio for example. For this use case it's convenient that selection ratio depends on the image's orientation/ratio. This is the way XnView Classic works and this is the way XnView MP is supposed to work.
Maybe it's a good idea to introduce a setting. Could you please start a seperate topic in suggestions with a link to this bug report?

**Second***
Not all pictures act this way. I have other Tall pic's that crop just fine. Same h x w, Also I have know way of knowing what way it will decide to select now.
Now I guess I need to find a sample where this action doesn't work.

As written above, selection ratio follows the orientation of the image. If you should find an image with different behaviour of the selection this would be a remaining bug. This bug report can be reopened, then.

Closed

[XnTriq]

The use case that was discussed many years ago was cropping images from 3:2 to 4:3 ratio for example.

Suggestion for Selection Ratio

[helmut]

Suggestion for Selection Ratio

Thanks for searching the forum and providing this valuable links. Interesting to read these intensive discussions held 12 years ago.