Spider wrote:

> Matt Giwer wrote:

> >     Lets not run down jpeg without qualifications. Depending on the image and
> > how it was saved the loss might not be noticable.
> >
> >     In other words, don't throw away what might be useful until you have tried
> > it.
>
> Exactely my pointelly . or something.
> Well, the new JPEG2000 standard look really promising, and also supports
> lossless(!) compression. just a side point, I know, I know, but it would
> still be a very nice thing to have that support in POV (output to jpeg
> lossless, input from any jpeg) (no, I don't want lossy compression out
> of POV, that would also increase the amount of beginner level questions
> about why the image looks so bad (aso aso))
>
> Well. there was a link in /. this month, didn't bookmark it though....

    The bad news is that in 1996 (95?) when I wrote my quick and dirty HTML guide I
mentioned that fractal compression was coming to browsers.

    I'll believe it when I see it.

Post a reply to this message