For The Love Of GOD! Please tell me there's an easy way to do this

[MAME]

I have about 3,000 pics on my computer that need to be name, sorted, and then reduced in file size (NOT THE SIZE OF THE PICTURE).

Naming and sorting isn't an issue for me, but jesus christ, the reducing file size is a pain in the ass.

I have this thing ("trick") that I do to all my pics and they take up about 30% of their original size on disk while retaining the same quality and size.

I open each one in mspaint (~30 at a time), then save and close it without making changes (Ctrl + s, Alt + F4). After the entire folder is done, I open the first picture with the built in XP picture viewer. Then I rotate it left, then right again and then move to the next picture (Ctrl + L, Ctrl + K, right arrow).

Is there a way to have the computer press these same buttons for me so that I don't have to do it 6,000 times?!

EDIT:
Here's an example using Vshah's spider pic:
Before
After

Now, this is an EXTREME example. It went from 496KB to 32KB. That's less than 10% of the original size. You can notice just a LITTLE bit of fuzz but seriously, it's like the same exact picture. Usually you can't notice at all (when it's more like 50% or so)

 

[Lonyo]

Select all the files, and then compress them using the built in WinXP compression thing.

 

[ndee]

Mouse and Key Recorder is your friend.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Select all the files, and then compress them using the built in WinXP compression thing.

ok...that's not what I want at all. What's the point of zipping them all in to one large file?

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: ndee
Mouse and Key Recorder is your friend.

ohh, score

googling now

 

[bockchow]

do you know what it is that your "trick" is doing to the file? find that out and you'll more than likely find a way to do it 100x easier.

 

[DeeKnow]

probably reducing bits per pixel... that should be okay for basic home photography. but with digital storage (CDR) so cheap, why even bother?

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: DeeKnow
probably reducing bits per pixel... that should be okay for basic home photography. but with digital storage (CDR) so cheap, why even bother?

eh, it's just easier to move around, load (view) and send via email or something. Besides, I don't have any burners of any kind

 

[bockchow]

i'm preaty sure you can do that with ifran veiwer and do them all in one batch.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: bockchow
do you know what it is that your "trick" is doing to the file? find that out and you'll more than likely find a way to do it 100x easier.

it's saving the file with less bits per pixel (so from say 32 bit colors to 16 bit). But only when you rotate the image will the picture size get reduced

In 98, it would reduce in size after mspaint closed

 

[Xionide]

Child pornography is a straining buisness isnt it MAME.

-Xionide

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: Xionide
Child pornography is a straining buisness isnt it MAME.

-Xionide

you should love gays! :heart: !!!!

 

[Imdmn04]

Write a program in java, using the robot mouse class.

 

[sygyzy]

Good lord. There are THREE ways I can count off the top of my head.

1. Re-read the first tip about using Windows XP compression. He is not talking about zip. You right click a bunch of files and it let's you batch resize them to any size. It can replace the originals or make copies.

2. Create a batch job in Photoshop.

3. Create a batch job in IfranView.

Edit: I realized you are just trying to reduce filesize. Thinking. Ok, nothing changes. You can still do all this with the above methods. You would just change JPG quality.

 

[0roo0roo]

infranview is free, batch resize or whatever.

save the originals on cdr or something. no point degrading all ur copies

 

[Eli]

If it reduces the size of the file by 70%, there's no way it has all the same data within the pic(quality).

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: Eli
If it reduces the size of the file by 70%, there's no way it has all the same data within the pic(quality).

the difference in quality is completely unnoticable to me

generally it's 50% though, I rarely see it under 50%

 

[DaFinn]

Rotating the picture reduces its quality, in some cases a lot. You might aswell change the packing quality of jpeg with any decent photoeditor (irfanview etc)... You can do this to all your photos at once.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: sygyzy
Good lord. There are THREE ways I can count off the top of my head.

1. Re-read the first tip about using Windows XP compression. He is not talking about zip. You right click a bunch of files and it let's you batch resize them to any size. It can replace the originals or make copies.

2. Create a batch job in Photoshop.

3. Create a batch job in IfranView.

Edit: I realized you are just trying to reduce filesize. Thinking. Ok, nothing changes. You can still do all this with the above methods. You would just change JPG quality.

can you explain how to do this using windows? I'm only aware of the zipping feature, not compression of pictures

 

[austin316]

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: sygyzy
Good lord. There are THREE ways I can count off the top of my head.

1. Re-read the first tip about using Windows XP compression. He is not talking about zip. You right click a bunch of files and it let's you batch resize them to any size. It can replace the originals or make copies.

2. Create a batch job in Photoshop.

3. Create a batch job in IfranView.

Edit: I realized you are just trying to reduce filesize. Thinking. Ok, nothing changes. You can still do all this with the above methods. You would just change JPG quality.

can you explain how to do this using windows? I'm only aware of the zipping feature, not compression of pictures

First you need windows XP. then go HERE and on the right handside, download and install imageresizer.exe then simply select all the files you want to resize, then right click them, and you will have an option to resize all of them.

 

[oboeguy]

Originally posted by: DaFinn
Rotating the picture reduces its quality, in some cases a lot. You might aswell change the packing quality of jpeg with any decent photoeditor (irfanview etc)... You can do this to all your photos at once.

Can someone explain why rotating the picture reduces the quality? That doesn't make any sense to me -- isn't equivalent to a matrix transpose?

BTW, put in my vote for Irfanview. (wtf is wrong with you people? give the dude a link )

 

[Rkonster]

Originally posted by: oboeguy

Originally posted by: DaFinn
Rotating the picture reduces its quality, in some cases a lot. You might aswell change the packing quality of jpeg with any decent photoeditor (irfanview etc)... You can do this to all your photos at once.

Can someone explain why rotating the picture reduces the quality? That doesn't make any sense to me -- isn't equivalent to a matrix transpose?

BTW, put in my vote for Irfanview. (wtf is wrong with you people? give the dude a link )

Yeah, I'd like to know this as well...

 

[CoveX]

Can someone explain why rotating the picture reduces the quality? That doesn't make any sense to me -- isn't equivalent to a matrix transpose?

BTW, put in my vote for Irfanview. (wtf is wrong with you people? give the dude a link )

Rotating 90 degrees shouldn't degrade the quality-- except that in this case what the image viewer actually does, is recompress and save the image at each rotation. With the OP's method that's two degradations. You can try this yourself by opening up a clean .jpg image and spinning it around for a bit. After a while you should have compression artifacts everywhere.

 

[Modeps]

I'd just create a batch photoshop job.

 

[Wuffsunie]

N/m