On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 21:11:43 +0100, "Thorsten Froehlich"
<tho### [at] trfde> wrote:

>In article <98rm40hhssc2d14g1u8c6fnbfrt1a801u2@4ax.com> , IMBJR 
><no### [at] spamhere>  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 19:07:43 +0100, "Thorsten Froehlich"
>> <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
>>>
>>>But JPEG 2000 is not a fix, it is a problem: It fails the fundamental design
>>>goal of any exchange format: Simplicity.
>>
>> Hahahaha! Like JPEG is simple. Ever tried reading the standard. Lord
>> its a mind-poker!
>
>I implemented an encoder a few years ago without any problems.  Reading it
>is no big deal once one gets used to the fact that the format decoding is
>specified, but not the encoding process itself.  Of course, to someone
>thinking JPEG is complex, JPEG 2000 must appear no different....

Kudos to you for that. I've considered it, but it really looked like a
particular hill this software engineer could not climb without
spending too much time that could be spent with one's "art".

>
>>>Both JPEG and PNG offer a simple
>>>interchange format, JPEG 2000 is far from simple on the other hand.  That it
>>>offeres better lossy compression, well, that is to be expected from a format
>>>created many years later, isn't it? ;-)
>>
>> Yes, so perhaps its time to stop nannying people and allow them to use
>> it to improve the appearance of images they post
>
>Nobody did.

Quoting something as either a rule or etiquette is nannying.

>
>>>Either way, and even if you don't agree with me, there are two facts that
>>>won't change soon:
>>>The web news view vill only support the three standard web image formats
>>>(GIF, PNG and JPEG).
>>
>> So you are going stall on this because of more inertia - the lack of
>> enthusiasm to get it working right, to figure a solution out. You are
>> going to let a minor thing like that get in the way?
>
>So you question my "enthusiasm to get [the web news view] working right"?
>You are entitled to your opinion, but I really think you just want a flame
>war.  Probably that is why you posted the image in the first place.

Don't be so silly. How the fuck does posting a new format and then
trying to get a serious debate going about it make for a a flame war?
If you see dissent as flames, then you have a major problem.

That's the problem with this entire news server. There's an air of
stagnation and isolationism about it. No-one seems capable of airing
any view that rankles with what might be termed the "elders".

>
>Next time, take such thing to povray.off-topic, not povray.general or p.b.i!

Perhaps this venue is not the best, but off-topic just seems full of
pointless discussion to begin with. This issue is a little more
in-depth to entrust to that place.

>
>Guess I will have to enable your killfile entry again.  Just noticed I had
>you in there before, but as you hadn't caused conflict in any groups I read
>for a long time, your entry was inactive...

Go on then. Hide under your rock. 

I shall, after wall, be continuing to post JPEG2000 images from now
on, since there is actually no actual hard-fast rule preventing me
from doing so - but you'lll miss them. Good for you.

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

Post a reply to this message