On Friday, May 30, 2003, at 10:09 US/Eastern, Joe Barwell wrote:

> On Fri, 30 May 2003, Chip Griffin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Seems very complex. I am a little more leery of such a direct
>> manipulation.
>
> Which begs the question why apparently indirect manipulation is less
> leer-inducing in some folk--is it because of the power of
> dissociation, i.e. one doesn't believe/fear one is meddling with a
> file's data fork because one doesn't directly observe it being meddled
> with, despite the fact that that is the known outcome (assuming
> meddlesome success)?

I am, as I suspect most non-experts are, a little hesitant to utilize
byte-tweaking technology. A time tested program such as GC or the
Finder doing the tweaking is fine. Writing an AppleScript to tweak
bytes is uncomfortable territory. Like it or not, that's the way it is.

> I'm making no promises that I've properly understood the JPEG file
> structure--there's probably an official definition available somewhere
> on the web.

That's exactly the point. It's more mysterious and arcane ...

-- Chip