4 ms·
Wouldn't it make more sense if `image::open()` automatically applied the orientation by default?
by ginko 1y ago
Wouldn't it make more sense if `image::open()` automatically applied the orientation by default?
- jcupitt 1y agoApplying rotation can have a large performance penalty (both cpu and memory), so you want to be able to avoid it if possible.
- hn92726819 1y agoProbably for a higher-level crate, (like the one the author wrote), but it adds computational complexity, and you don't want that by default with a low level crate like `image`. For example, if you wanted to blur or grayscale an image, do you really want to rotate it? When you re-save it, you'll have to remove the exif rotation metadata too.