Talk:Windows Photo Viewer

ok
OK dear friends have at it. I appreciate all your good editing. Phil talk 18:12, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

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

suggestions
&mdash; MFH: Talk 22:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 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 ?....)
 * 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)

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)

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)

Silver lining
Go to 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.

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)

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.

The ability to modify a file by rotating can be considered undesirable in an application that is otherwise read-only on the file. &mdash; EagleOne\Talk 01:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

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? &mdash; EagleOne\Talk 03:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

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 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)

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 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)

where is the executable
What brought me to this page, but unfortunately without satisfying result, was the question where I find the executable for this software, by default. As I do not know the name of the executable, i also do not know how to search for it. I am sure, this question is a piece of cake for some here, so please help me. T om ea s y T C 16:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ooups, just found inthe article that an executable does not exist. In this case, does anyone have an idea how I can link this program as default application for a specific file. T om ea s y T C 16:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In my opinion you shouldn't bother a lot... just use XnView, it's better... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.126.79 (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * On Windows XP and Windows 2003, if the viewer doesn't seem to be installed you can restore it by running the command  from a command window or the Run prompt. You can also set the actions for specific file extensions using the command  . If you don't know where to use this, you may be better off skipping it - it takes you into areas where you can start to really break things in ways that are not easily fixed automatically. Fencepost (talk) 15:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Where is it in Vista? 173.31.95.48 (talk) 11:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * You're replying to a thread that's 11 years old and a user who hasn't edited since 2015, so you'll likely not receive a response. Also please note that this is out-of-scope for this Talk page per WP:NOTFORUM. DonIago (talk) 16:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Lossless rotation
According to JPEGClub.org, the Windows Image Preview rotation is lossless. This is in contradiction with the statement in this article.

I have done minor testing myself. For the JPEGs i've tested, as long as jpegtran can rotate it losslessly, this program can rotate it losslessly. --Voidvector (talk) 06:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Based on my read of the forum citation used in this article, this program simply doesn't give user a warning when lossless rotation isn't possible and it falls back to lossy rotation. As far as I can tell Lossy factor is due to JPEG limitation, i.e. the dimension not divisible by 8 or 16. Same limitation exists in jpegtran. --Voidvector (talk) 06:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

How to specify program with which to open image if WPaFV is default handler?
RE:, in Features: "Close the viewer and open image the image in the default image editor registered for that image type (Microsoft Paint by default)."

Does anyone know how to specify which image editor to use if Windows Picture and Fax Viewer is the default image handler? Seems like this would be good info to include here. (I know it would've been helpful for me! I still haven't figured it out...)

For example, I want WPaFV to be the default image handler, but if I click the icon to open the image in an editor, I want it to open in Photoshop (not MSPaint). "???"

philiptdotcom (talk) 22:00, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's how to do it: http://www.pcreview.co.uk/forums/thread-2072721.php

philiptdotcom (talk) 22:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

معتز —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.235.47.73 (talk) 13:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Lossless rotation etc.
I removed three unsourced (and, in my opinion, wrong) statements from the article. In particular, jpeg rotation is lossless if the image size permits this, and (to respond to the discussion above) the program does warn the user if this is not possible. I just tested that, which is 'original reasarch', of course, but we should not assume that the program does anything wrong simply because it comes from Microsoft ... Also, I could not reproduce the incorrect positioning which was mentioned in the article. -- Momotaro (talk) 17:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Overwriting files without asking
Why does Windows Picture and Fax Viewer automatically save changes you make to photos without asking first? If I rotate an image, just to see how it would look, it automatically overwrites the original file without asking. I wouldn't care if it saved it under a different name (eg the original name with ~1 after it), but I really don't think any program should be overwriting one of your files without asking first, whether the rotation is lossless or not. Is there a way to stop it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.124.183 (talk) 10:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

59960_157100670984985_100000551606143_417193_7248939_n —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.131.128.237 (talk) 18:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Not included in Windows 10?
Is the Windows Photo Viewer not included in Windows 10? Whenever I open a picture after I upgraded to 10 build 10176 from 8.0, it opens with the 'app' called 'Windows Photo'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.229.177 (talk) 09:34, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Same here, I upgraded a Microsoft Windows 7 device to Windows 10 and the Windows Photo Viewer app is still accessible, I am beginning to ask if the claim that it's not in Windows 10 is an unfounded one. Can someone please provide a reliable citation for this claim?
 * --1.55.1.190 (talk) 07:29, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi. Although I am not sure to what 71.59.229.177 is referring, I studied a little and it seems Windows Photo Viewer in 10 suffers from a bug that prevent it from running. I can't tell whether it is right or wrong. Lets wait a few month and see how things turn out. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 09:51, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No bugs at my end, it just functions well. Maybe Microsoft is in the process of discontinuing it but so far I've not read anywhere that it has been discontinued and usually the party making the claim should provide a source otherwise it's original research but then again the same would apply if I'd restore it out of my personal observations as opposed to using a citation, can't you find any sources that say either way? --Hoang the Hoangest (talk) 06:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That's because your end is not the bug, but the evidence of possible bug. Imagine Microsoft deleted something needed to run WPV in build 10240 but not older builds. The person who installs 10240 clean does not have it, but the person who upgrades to 10240 has it carried over from the old build.


 * Now, was the deletion deliberate (i.e. discontinuation) or unintentional (i.e. bug). Time will tell.
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk)

Photo orientation
Under Windows 8.1, Windows Photo Viewer does read exif orientation and show images properly based upon that. --StarGeek (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi.
 * Unless you believe this is a venue for reporting bugs to Microsoft (which isn't), I don't see what I can do with what you said. Could you please spell it out?
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)