krishnananda <k@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
<snip>
> > Hope you won't mind me using your message to pass more info to the OP
(I
> > don't like top posting so I don't have the original message).
> >
> > As I have suggested in the first response to try with Graphic
*VIEWER*
> > instead of Graphic Editor, because there is some differences between
them.
> > Same with IE which isn't neither Viewer nor Editor but a browser just
happen
> > to be able to display few formats. More detail
> >
> > - Most if not all VIEWERS should be able to display (open) just about
ALL
> > extentions, and they won't mind if the extension been changed from one
to
> > other.
> >
> > - Most if not all EDITOR won't open the graphic file with *wrong*
extension,
> > because they don't treat all formats the same, and they open to Edit
*not*
> > just for Displaying.
> >
>
> Yes, but: ImageMagic and other well-written graphics file editors pay no
> attention to the file's name or extension. They read the file's header
> to see what the file is supposed to contain. For example, a tiff with an
> 8-bit preview, LZW compression, and Macintosh (PPC) byte order is very
> different from a tiff with a 1-bit preview, no compression, and PC byte
> order. If you have files a.tif and b.tif you can extract that header
> info and see whether the file's contents match the header information,
> without doing any destructive editing. File extensions _should be_ only
> for the convenience of the OS's GUI. Unfortunately, lazy programmers
> take them as gospel.
As I said most if not all, so there is a small chance that there is one
or
some. And if ImageMagic does then it's good for MagicImage and I hope it
does it right which I don't think so.
|
