On 7 Mar 2004 12:37:01 -0500, Tom Galvin <tom### [at] imporg> wrote:

>Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in news:404b53d0@news.povray.org:
>
>
>> 
>>   How does PNG help to reduce file sizes compared to JPEG?
>> 
>
>Not compared to jpeg, but compared to other uncompressed formats.  

We are talking about jpeg/jepg2000 here, don't wander off and write
about other, uncompressed, formats.

>
>> 
>>   But JPEG is "broken". 
>
>The p.b.i newsgroup is not broken.  

Pay fucking attention. Did he say that the newsgroup was broken? No he
fucking did not. He said that the format was.

>People can share images in a format 
>that is widely supported(jpeg).  If the need arises there is an alternate 
>format that is almost as pervasive that uses completely lossless 
>compression for maximum image quality at greater than 8-bit color(PNG).
>
>The p.b.a newsgroup "IS" broken.  How many times have you read "I can't 
>see your animation" because somebody used some super new codec.  Or worse 
>you have a dozen codecs installed just to read that newsgroup.  Do we 
>really want to go down that road with p.b.i.

Stop nannying these people. Let them decide how to deal with it.

>
>
>IMHO, this whole JPEG2000 debate is putting the cart before the horse.  
>First you define the problem, then you develop the solution.  If the 

That's what the fuck happened. JPEG was not up to the job - JPEG2000
was developed as a response.

>problem is "displaying images of >8-bit color depth", then there are more 
>options available besides JPEG2000.  

And none giving good compression rations like JPEG2000 does.

>
>I personally prefer PNG and Open EXR ;)

More power to your elbow, but we are talking jpeg/2000 here.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message