Comments on: pre-parsing HTML for incorrectly-sized images http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/ klog - Kae's Log Mon, 21 May 2012 21:11:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: klog » Blog Archive » php and jquery chp7: image manipulation http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/#comment-1133 klog » Blog Archive » php and jquery chp7: image manipulation Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:43:53 +0000 http://verens.com/?p=474#comment-1133 [...] The idea is that when you upload an image, it’s usually not yet right to include in a website. People tend to upload massive photos (3000×2000 or so) and resize it down using the <img> attributes, which is the wrong way to do it (see here for a solution to that particular problem). [...] [...] The idea is that when you upload an image, it’s usually not yet right to include in a website. People tend to upload massive photos (3000×2000 or so) and resize it down using the <img> attributes, which is the wrong way to do it (see here for a solution to that particular problem). [...]

]]> By: amos http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/#comment-1132 amos Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:54:54 +0000 http://verens.com/?p=474#comment-1132 teaching the client to crop (and why it is important) is the best way to work this out. and to make it even easier, there is nothing simpler then http://www.easycropper.com/ . hope i could help! Amos teaching the client to crop (and why it is important) is the best way to work this out.

and to make it even easier, there is nothing simpler then http://www.easycropper.com/ .

hope i could help!

Amos

]]> By: Kae Verens http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/#comment-1131 Kae Verens Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:48:38 +0000 http://verens.com/?p=474#comment-1131 I should probably have explained my reasoning there. The use of an exec there was a calculated choice. GD (and Imagick, the built-in version of ImageMagick) both "suffer" from the memory setting in /etc/php.ini. While it is a great and essential limitation for most cases, in this case, we know that the image manipulation will probably go over that limit, but also that it's a once-off problem. Programs run through exec(), however, are not counted when PHP's memory usage is calculated. Also, it's much quicker to write a simple one-liner like I did above, than to go to the effort needed for GD or Imagick. As far as I can see, there are no security flaws in the code I wrote - all values run through the exec() function are filtered beforehand (addslashes(), regexps). The only real problem here is portability - the function requires a Linux server, and that the external ImageMagick program be installed. However, as a proof of concept, I think I can be allowed that flaw ;-) Stevan, feel free to use it as you wish. Ryan, i know what you mean, and I really did think about the exec() function before I used it. I should probably have explained my reasoning there. The use of an exec there was a calculated choice.

GD (and Imagick, the built-in version of ImageMagick) both “suffer” from the memory setting in /etc/php.ini. While it is a great and essential limitation for most cases, in this case, we know that the image manipulation will probably go over that limit, but also that it’s a once-off problem. Programs run through exec(), however, are not counted when PHP’s memory usage is calculated.

Also, it’s much quicker to write a simple one-liner like I did above, than to go to the effort needed for GD or Imagick.

As far as I can see, there are no security flaws in the code I wrote – all values run through the exec() function are filtered beforehand (addslashes(), regexps).

The only real problem here is portability – the function requires a Linux server, and that the external ImageMagick program be installed. However, as a proof of concept, I think I can be allowed that flaw ;-)

Stevan, feel free to use it as you wish. Ryan, i know what you mean, and I really did think about the exec() function before I used it.

]]> By: lifewithryan http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/#comment-1130 lifewithryan Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:41:07 +0000 http://verens.com/?p=474#comment-1130 I agree, good ideas, but use GD instead....exec scares the bajeezus outta me. I agree, good ideas, but use GD instead….exec scares the bajeezus outta me.

]]> By: Stevan Goode http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/#comment-1129 Stevan Goode Tue, 29 Jul 2008 18:22:40 +0000 http://verens.com/?p=474#comment-1129 Hi, This is a good solution to the problem, however the exec makes me cringe somewhat. Personally, I would use the GD library to do the resize, but that's just me. Well done on a good routine :-) I think I might 'borrow' it for my projects. Thanks, Steve Hi,

This is a good solution to the problem, however the exec makes me cringe somewhat. Personally, I would use the GD library to do the resize, but that’s just me.

Well done on a good routine :-) I think I might ‘borrow’ it for my projects.

Thanks,

Steve

]]> By: Kae Verens’ Blog: pre-parsing HTML for incorrectly-sized images | Development Blog With Code Updates : Developercast.com http://verens.com/2008/07/27/pre-parsing-html-for-incorrectly-sized-images/#comment-1128 Kae Verens’ Blog: pre-parsing HTML for incorrectly-sized images | Development Blog With Code Updates : Developercast.com Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:40:29 +0000 http://verens.com/?p=474#comment-1128 [...] Verens has a recent blog post that looks at a method for helping to protect users from themselves when working with images - a [...] [...] Verens has a recent blog post that looks at a method for helping to protect users from themselves when working with images – a [...]

]]>