IMBJR wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:49:22 -0000, "scott" <spa### [at] spamcom> wrote:
>
> > IMBJR wrote:
> > > On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:26:34 -0000, "scott" <spa### [at] spamcom> wrote:
> > >
> > > > IMBJR wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:58:09 -0000, "scott" <sco### [at] spamcom>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > The problems are never all ironed out. If you followed
> > > > > > > your rule to the letter you wouldn't even have appeared
> > > > > > > on this group.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I call 99% of people not being able to see my images a
> > > > > > fairly big problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that figure may be inaccurate. Plus, how do we go
> > > > > about measuring that figure. We cannot just simply ask
> > > > > whether or not people can see the image, we would have to
> > > > > also ask if they were able to do something that would enable
> > > > > them to see the image.
> > > >
> > > > Well, I think if people can't see it using their normal methods
> > > > for viewing images then that counts as them not being able to
> > > > see it. It's pointless trying to expect them to do anything
> > > > different - most people won't.
> > >
> > > Don't make such bold assumptions as to how many will. Try not to
> > > think of you as an example of how others will react.
> >
> > Out of most people I know I think I am at the top end of using new
> > technologies out of all of them, thus I have no reason not to think
> > that in general most people won't bother installing or know how to
> > install special software for J2K.
> >
> > > > > I never expected them too. I never even expected to have to
> > > > > champion JPEG2000. I merely used it as a way of preserving
> > > > > image characteristics.
> > > >
> > > > So, what % of people do you think are going to downgrade your
> > > > image to 8-bit before viewing it?  Ummm, I think that would be
> > > > >99% :-)
> > >
> > > LOL Keep up.
> > > There's more than just 16-bit JPEG2000 images available from me
> > > down.
> >
> > That sentance doesn't really make sense,
>
> Dear me. Look on the images group and you will see.

I meant your sentance doesn't make sense.  In particular the "...available
from me down." bit!

> > but I don't understand how a 16-bit
> > image can be any better than an 8-bit image when displayed through
> > 8-bit DACs.  Please explain.
>
> This has already been covered. If you can't keep up, don't bother.

Yeah I thought it had too!

> > > Your obsession with actual figures is worrying. It's as if you
> > > have some higher knowledge of what takes place here. But you do
> > > not.
> >
> > You're just scared of the figures.
>
> They do not exist for a start.

You're full of silly comments, of course they do, it's just *you* don't know
what the figure is.  Hence I asked you to *estimate*!

> > You also seem incapable of answering
> > questions.  Please estimate what % of people will downgrade your
> > image to 8-bit before viewing it.  I think it's quite high, what do
> > you think?
>
> Again, you are worrying to much about actual numbers.

Please estimate what % of people will downgrade your image to 8-bit before
viewing it.

> > > > > And as for it being a waste of time, no, in fact, judging by
> > > > > some of the replies it looks like it has been an education
> > > > > for some.
> > > >
> > > > yeah, they've learnt that it isn't worth using at the moment!
> > >
> > > Don't be silly. Re-read what people have been saying. Some have
> > > actually made the effort to learn more and try and use the
> > > software.
> >
> > Indeed, and I'm one of the "some".  However the benefit of a
> > slightly smaller file size (or slightly worse compression) is not
> > enough to spend 10 times longer opening each image.  When people
> > can view J2K images just as quickly as normal JPEGs, there will be
> > no problem.
>
> Yadda yadda.

Look, if you're not even going answer any questions or comments I put to
you, what's the point in you posting?  I wasn't sure to start with, but
quite clearly you are just trolling.  I'd rather spend my time debating with
people who respond to my views.  Plonk!

Post a reply to this message