For those following the current Adobe/Omniture bruha, John Nack has posted an explanation that I find plausible & mostly forgivable. (In a nutshell: it's all Macromedia's fault.)
I do think that we as customers need to demand more transparency in regards to what our software programs are doing on the web (Microsoft, I'm talking to you, too!) as well as more explicit opt-in/opt-out for this stuff, and I'm hopeful that Mr. Nack can be an agent for positive change in that regard, based on what he's posted in the link above.
And that's all I have to say on the matter. Honest.
Andrew beat me to it, but I'll just reinforce his point. Simply opening a JPEG does it no harm. Even rewriting the metadata is harmless. It is when you do an edit forcing a re-encoding of the data (and thus re-compressing it) that you lose quality. It normally takes several cycles at higher quality settings before the effect is noticeable.
Comments
For those following the current Adobe/Omniture bruha, John Nack has posted an explanation that I find plausible & mostly forgivable. (In a nutshell: it's all Macromedia's fault.)
I do think that we as customers need to demand more transparency in regards to what our software programs are doing on the web (Microsoft, I'm talking to you, too!) as well as more explicit opt-in/opt-out for this stuff, and I'm hopeful that Mr. Nack can be an agent for positive change in that regard, based on what he's posted in the link above.
And that's all I have to say on the matter. Honest.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/