How to remove windows photo gallery


 Share

Recommended Posts

vraev

Hi guys,

I was thrilled with a nice simple photogallery application in vista. I was using it since I got vista. Then I was happy when they were going to add flickr publishing as I am a heavy flickr user.

However..... i had to install windows photogallery LIVE for it. I mean comeon....what about the thing that vista already has? Atleast give us an option to overwrite that existing application in vista. seriously its soo stupid. The same duplicate of the application. its like MS itself has given up on photo gallery in vista.

BTW...I tried add/remove componets....photo gallery isn't in there.

Is there anyway to remove the photogallery of vista cleanly or should I say "uninstall it"??

thanks,

V

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grope for Luna

Unregister PhotoViewer.dll and PhotoAcq.dll and delete the folder. There probably isn't much more to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lt-DavidW

Is it possible to remove Windows Photo Gallery but keep the Picture Viewer, like XP?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grope for Luna

I think the Picture Viewer is the Photo Gallery. I use ACDSEE so I don't remember.

Link to post
Share on other sites

soldier1st

on vista i would use fast stone image viewer,tones better than the one in vista and it is free and does the job well

Link to post
Share on other sites

HawkMan

For vieweing individual pictures directly from explirer Ifran or Faststone is better.

but WPG/WLG is excellent for browsing pictures and for doign non destructive editiong of pictures(too bad you can't do it on raw's though...)

and it's got excellent scrensaver thingy with the playback thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grope for Luna

If I could scroll through pictures with the mouse wheel (instead of zoom in-out) I would use it as a general image viewer, but having to click the forward-back buttons is a deal killer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vraev

well....the scrolling is solved if you have one of the logitech V6 mice. I have one...and it has forward and backward buttons. Anyways....hmmmm so I guess there is no CLEAN UNINSTALL of it other than doing the behind the scenes dll stuff and all? Well! I guess we need to live with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lt-DavidW
but WPG/WLG is excellent for browsing pictures and for doign non destructive editiong of pictures(too bad you can't do it on raw's though...)

But when you rotate a photo using WPG, doesn't it resave the JPEG (resulting in more compression artifacts)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brandon Live
However..... i had to install windows photogallery LIVE for it. I mean comeon....what about the thing that vista already has? Atleast give us an option to overwrite that existing application in vista. seriously its soo stupid. The same duplicate of the application. its like MS itself has given up on photo gallery in vista.

Usually if something like this doesn't make sense, you can blame it on legal requirements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lt-DavidW

Bump on this question:

when you rotate a photo using Vista WPG, does it resave the JPEG (resulting in more compression)?
Link to post
Share on other sites

jmc777
But when you rotate a photo using WPG, doesn't it resave the JPEG (resulting in more compression artifacts)?

According to John Thornton (Windows Photo and Imaging Program Manager) the answer is "it depends".

Indeed as you notice we actually rotate the file. In most cases this rotation is completely lossless. There is absolutely no pixel data loss when performing a lossless JPEG rotation where the dimensions of the photo are a multiple of the block size (which isn?t always 8, it is more often 16). I don?t believe that there are any current cameras that generate files that cannot be losslessly rotated (some older cameras did, however).

I don't know if this still applies to WLPG because his post was from September 2006.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lt-DavidW
According to John Thornton (Windows Photo and Imaging Program Manager) the answer is "it depends".

I don't know if this still applies to WLPG because his post was from September 2006.

It would make more much sense for WPG/WLPG to simply display the image on screen as specified by a rotation tag.

That way, when you rotate an image the program simply needs to change the rotation tag and not resize and recompress the entire image.

I never understood why they didn't do this. :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brandon Live
It would make more much sense for WPG/WLPG to simply display the image on screen as specified by a rotation tag.

That way, when you rotate an image the program simply needs to change the rotation tag and not resize and recompress the entire image.

I never understood why they didn't do this. :huh:

Just a guess, but...

Probably because most other applications and devices don't obey that tag. Users would probably get pretty annoyed if they rotated an image in WPG, then dragged it an e-mail from Explorer and saw it was sideways again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.