Talk:Windows Picture and Fax Viewer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
OK dear friends have at it. I appreciate all your good editing. Phil talk 18:12, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] What images are in file
When I look at a pic with this, I have the option to scroll through other images the viewer seems to pull from sites I visted. What causes an image to be put in that cache? That should be included in this article
66.99.0.75 (talk) 17:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)eric
[edit] suggestions
- WMF, EMF (and maybe other) formats should be added
- "but .. has to be associated ... if ... open with another program" : this is not precise, the association is only needed for double-clicking. The whole of these phrases is not at all specific to this program but applies to any other document type resp. program in the same way. Maybe this "additional info" could go somewhere else than in the introduction. (It is already mentioned (somehow) somewhere else.)
- I have some scepsis about the "TIFF" thing further down (editing capab's?), in any case this would be contradictory to the "viewer only" statement at the end of the introduction.
- The whole of this article should be reconsidered in view of what is wikepedia... (e.g., I can't see the interest of the screenshot of a part of the help page - why not rather a screenshot of the program itself when launched to view something ?....)
— MFH: Talk 22:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
- What is the name of the executable file?
- There is no particular exe file that brings out the viewer, but instead the shimgvw.dll. --Aeon17x 06:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Horrible, horrible!
This piece of software tends to render PNG's incorrectly. I work for a company that produces compiler software and as such I examine a lot of dot-generated renderings of graphs which contain representations of source code. At some point I was extremely surprised to notice that in one graph, a + operator has magically been replaced with a - operator, because a vertical line (the middle one of the image) was completely missing. I wasted quite some time before noticing that in fact the image was correct, but the viewer was wrong! Wouter Lievens 14:44, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
- This is not an NPOV issue. What we need here (in section Criticism) is a "reputable publication" giving words to the complaint; see WP:NOR. Lambiam 11:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bad image
Image:WindowsPictureacp.png looks really bad, as if it was upscaled without interpolation. Someone should make a new version. --Michiel Sikma 21:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- I uploaded one zoomed to 150% percent, please take a look if it's okay. --Aeon17x 06:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Silver lining
Go to [1] and see if your browser passes the test. IE and FF don't. I don't have Opera, so can't say. Now download the pictures and open with the subject of the article.
[edit] NPOV/weasel words in the article
I don't think this article has an NPOV:
- 'Apart from its rudimentary image rotating tool...'—this should be rewritten to emphasise the 90 degree rotation in both directions. Let the reader, not the writer, decide if it's rudimentary.
- '...the Windows Picture and Fax Viewer only views, and does not edit images'—an image viewer is meant to do just that—view images.
- '...it sometimes causes entire lines to not be rendered, which can be very confusing when examining critical image data'—how can you tell the difference between 'confusing' and 'very confusing'? If the image data isn't critical, but a line's missing, does that mean it's not confusing?
- '...but it can easily be replaced as the default by another viewer/editor...'—does the word 'easily' need to be included?
- 'It even supports lossless rotation of images'.—this sounds like it was written by someone who was expecting the new image viewer to do a lot less, and then he or she was surprised.
Do people agree? I'm going to flag the article in the meantime.
Michael2 05:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unsourced statements removed from the article
The following passages were removed from the article because they have been unsourced since July 2007. If anyone can find a valid, verifiable source for these claims, then please add them back to the article.
The viewer is known to not render PNG images correctly at times. Even at a 100% zoom level, it sometimes causes entire lines to not be rendered, which can be very confusing when examining critical image data. [citation needed]
The ability to modify a file by rotating can be considered undesirable in an application that is otherwise read-only on the file.[citation needed] — EagleOne\Talk 01:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Is WP&FV a color-managed app?
I've been trying to find a solid, verifiable source for WPFV's ICC profile capabilities. Some sources say it is managed, and others (equally adamantly) say that it ignores ICC Profiles. Even the ones that do claim ICC compatibility say nothing about specific versions. Of course, I haven't seen anything on this topic from Microsoft itself. Here are the links I've found so far from my searches:
- Yes, WPFV is color-managed
- Not color-managed
The weight of evidence here is clearly in the Yes camp, but most of these links are forum posts, which generally aren't allowed as references. Can anyone help me find a definitive answer to this question? — EagleOne\Talk 03:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WindowsPictureFaxtoolbar.png
Image:WindowsPictureFaxtoolbar.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 03:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Could someone update to include default installation directory and command for calling from batch or external program.--128.221.197.21 (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:P&F-V-icon.PNG
Image:P&F-V-icon.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 16:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
