|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 7 Mar 2004 12:37:01 -0500, Tom Galvin <tom### [at] imp org> wrote:
>Warp <war### [at] tag povray org> 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
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |