making icons for folders


T

thewiz

Is there a way to make icons from jpg photos?
If so how would you do it?
Thank you for any help.
 
Ad

Advertisements

J

Jeff Barnett

thewiz wrote, On 5/21/2013 6:07 PM:
Is there a way to make icons from jpg photos?
If so how would you do it?
Thank you for any help.
If I understand what you want to do ....
Put a jpg in a folder and name it folder.jpg. That works in XP for music
files and a few other things. It might work for Win 7 too.

Jeff Barnett
 
W

...winston

"thewiz" wrote in message
Is there a way to make icons from jpg photos?
If so how would you do it?
Thank you for any help.
Irfanview (a free program) can be used to save a jpg file as an *.ico file
- it might be appropriate to note that many icon files have a common width and height dimension (e.g. 32 x 32 pixels). Thus
creating an icon from a jpg file may require cropping the jpg file to have a common width/height before saving as *.ico file to
ensure the icon renders properly when used.
 
B

BeeJ

"thewiz" wrote in message news:[email protected]
Irfanview (a free program) can be used to save a jpg file as an *.ico file
- it might be appropriate to note that many icon files have a common width
and height dimension (e.g. 32 x 32 pixels). Thus creating an icon from a jpg
file may require cropping the jpg file to have a common width/height before
saving as *.ico file to ensure the icon renders properly when used.
Win 7 handles icon sizes up to 256x256 if I remember correctly.
So try that first since many JPG or other images detail will be lost at
32x32 and below.
Win XP is only up to 32x32.
Many new apps have multiple sizes internally up to the max for Win7 but
still more only have the max at 32x32.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

"thewiz" wrote in message

Irfanview (a free program) can be used to save a jpg file as an *.ico file
- it might be appropriate to note that many icon files have a common width and height dimension (e.g. 32 x 32 pixels). Thus
creating an icon from a jpg file may require cropping the jpg file to have a common width/height before saving as *.ico file to
ensure the icon renders properly when used.
Resizing rather than cropping might be in order if you want the whole
picture in the icon.
 
Ad

Advertisements

J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

Gene E. Bloch said:
Resizing rather than cropping might be in order if you want the whole
picture in the icon.
You might still need to crop too (or pad with black bars), unless the
original image is square, which is unusual. (Finding slide/negative
scanners that will scan 126-format - "instamatic" - slides/negatives
without cropping isn't easy! They do exist but at a premium. Sorry,
that's a side issue.)
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

You might still need to crop too (or pad with black bars), unless the
original image is square, which is unusual. (Finding slide/negative
scanners that will scan 126-format - "instamatic" - slides/negatives
without cropping isn't easy! They do exist but at a premium. Sorry,
that's a side issue.)
Good point about the shape. Thanks.

Not so sure about the Instamatic :)
 
W

...winston

Gene said:
Resizing rather than cropping might be in order if you want the whole
picture in the icon.
Cropping to a equivalent width/height dimension might make better sense
to render a better looking and proportioned icon.

As an example (jpg pictures when saved as an *.ico file)
- a square jpg picture http://sdrv.ms/11e7hsL
vs.
- a non-square jpg picture http://sdrv.ms/16XgWND

The former may yield better results...but then again beauty of one's
efforts may be in the eye of the beholder!
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Cropping to a equivalent width/height dimension might make better sense
to render a better looking and proportioned icon.

As an example (jpg pictures when saved as an *.ico file)
- a square jpg picture http://sdrv.ms/11e7hsL
vs.
- a non-square jpg picture http://sdrv.ms/16XgWND

The former may yield better results...but then again beauty of one's
efforts may be in the eye of the beholder!
I don't think those pictures are the usual kind of program icons. But
anyway, cropping makes sense if:

1. The picture isn't square and it should be made square, as pointed out
by J. P. Gilliver.

*or*

2. The picture contains extraneous information, i.e, what the user wants
for an icon is a portion of the picture area.

I took your original remark to mean that if a user had just the square
picture he wanted for an icon, but it had too many pixels, he should
trim some information away, leaving a portion with a standard number of
pixels, instead of resizing the picture to a standard number of pixels.

On that interpretation, I stand by my position (am I therefore beside
myself?).
 
W

...winston

Gene said:
I don't think those pictures are the usual kind of program icons. But
anyway, cropping makes sense if:

1. The picture isn't square and it should be made square, as pointed out
by J. P. Gilliver.

*or*

2. The picture contains extraneous information, i.e, what the user wants
for an icon is a portion of the picture area.

I took your original remark to mean that if a user had just the square
picture he wanted for an icon, but it had too many pixels, he should
trim some information away, leaving a portion with a standard number of
pixels, instead of resizing the picture to a standard number of pixels.

On that interpretation, I stand by my position (am I therefore beside
myself?).
Yes, I could have been clearer regarding the pixel size I referenced
solely as an example as a possible limitation with a need to crop thus
your interpretation would be accurate.

The purpose of my two picture (linked) example was to illustrate that if
the second picture (with a height a multiple of width) was used it
wouldn't render as well as the perfectly square picture.

You'd be surprised at the types of pictures that I've seen people use as
icons for shortcuts for just about any program.
 
Ad

Advertisements

G

Gene E. Bloch

Yes, I could have been clearer regarding the pixel size I referenced
solely as an example as a possible limitation with a need to crop thus
your interpretation would be accurate.
Looks like we're communicating OK now.
The purpose of my two picture (linked) example was to illustrate that if
the second picture (with a height a multiple of width) was used it
wouldn't render as well as the perfectly square picture.
I just made a screen background for an Android app from a picture that
was the wrong size and the wrong aspect ratio. It didn't take too long.

First scale to the dimension that isn't too long, then crop the other
dimension. It would've been easier if I were (1) more familiar wth Gimp
and IrfanView, and (2) more coordinated :)

That obviously wasn't an icon, but some of the same ideas apply.
You'd be surprised at the types of pictures that I've seen people use as
icons for shortcuts for just about any program.
Probably :)

Or should I say :) instead?
 
W

...winston

Gene said:
I just made a screen background for an Android app from a picture that
was the wrong size and the wrong aspect ratio. It didn't take too long.

First scale to the dimension that isn't too long, then crop the other
dimension. It would've been easier if I were (1) more familiar wth Gimp
and IrfanView, and (2) more coordinated :)

That obviously wasn't an icon, but some of the same ideas apply.


Probably :)

Or should I say :) instead?
It does help understanding the screen size or limitations of the device
where the intended picture (background, screen saver, etc.) is to be
used prior to editing (resize, crop, etc.) Irfanview for the most part
meets most of my (or recommended to others) picture editing needs since
it has the option to choose over a dozen selectable common resize
dimensions or manually enter dimensions retaining the same aspect ratio
and the ability to custom crop a selected area to a pre-defined
width/height ratio with subsequent ability to resize the selection
maintaining the same actual ratio.

With the advent of wide screen monitors some of those pictures
created/cropped for use during the 4:3 monitor era can really look
horrendous. Likewise if that second pic (of Milla) was stretched or
resized for use as a background, screen saver, icon, without some
forethought that white box [which most wouldn't even notice she's
sitting on] just wouldn't look right.
 
B

BeeJ

Do not forget that looking at an icon in a viewer for icons the icon
looks pretty bad but when the icon is viewed at its actual size it
looks pretty good. I create icons all the time and grab existing icons
that look good and put them in the viewer and wonder how someone was
able to create such a good looking icon when it looks so bad when blown
up. Our brain seems to enhance the actual icon. Just need to
understand that a little more.
 
S

Shoe

Looks like we're communicating OK now.


I just made a screen background for an Android app from a picture that
was the wrong size and the wrong aspect ratio. It didn't take too long.

First scale to the dimension that isn't too long, then crop the other
dimension. It would've been easier if I were (1) more familiar wth Gimp
and IrfanView, and (2) more coordinated :)

That obviously wasn't an icon, but some of the same ideas apply.


Probably :)

Or should I say :) instead?
Here's another way to get at most of what you get from the internet -
I bought a Sony Blu-Ray player at Costco for about $80. It connects to
the TV with HDMI cable and to the internet through my wireless router.
It can stream video from Amazon, Netflix, YouTube and a whole bunch of
other sources. It works very well for us.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

Gene said:
I just made a screen background for an Android app from a picture that
was the wrong size and the wrong aspect ratio. It didn't take too long.

First scale to the dimension that isn't too long, then crop the other
dimension. It would've been easier if I were (1) more familiar wth Gimp
and IrfanView, and (2) more coordinated :)

That obviously wasn't an icon, but some of the same ideas apply.


Probably :)

Or should I say :) instead?
It does help understanding the screen size or limitations of the device
where the intended picture (background, screen saver, etc.) is to be
used prior to editing (resize, crop, etc.) Irfanview for the most part
meets most of my (or recommended to others) picture editing needs since
it has the option to choose over a dozen selectable common resize
dimensions or manually enter dimensions retaining the same aspect ratio
and the ability to custom crop a selected area to a pre-defined
width/height ratio with subsequent ability to resize the selection
maintaining the same actual ratio.

With the advent of wide screen monitors some of those pictures
created/cropped for use during the 4:3 monitor era can really look
horrendous. Likewise if that second pic (of Milla) was stretched or
resized for use as a background, screen saver, icon, without some
forethought that white box [which most wouldn't even notice she's
sitting on] just wouldn't look right.
BTW, I meant my second smiley to be a frowney like this :-(

Some people just can't seem to proofread consistently...
 
Ad

Advertisements

W

...winston

"Shoe" wrote in message Here's another way to get at most of what you get from the internet -
I bought a Sony Blu-Ray player at Costco for about $80. It connects to
the TV with HDMI cable and to the internet through my wireless router.
It can stream video from Amazon, Netflix, YouTube and a whole bunch of
other sources. It works very well for us.
@Shoe,
Wrong thread :)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top