Alan Kong wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Jul 1999 21:16:54 +0100, Alain CULOS <ZAl### [at] bigfootcom>
> wrote:
>
> >I do use PNG almost exclusively myself, then use third party tools to
> >convert/crop/rescale/... But there is a specific case where jpeg output might be
> >desirable :
> >
> >Project :
> >The IMP (Internet Movie Project)
>
>   For consistency's sake I can see why you would want a standardized output,
> since so many individuals would be generating the frames.
>
> >- JPEG settings will be chosen at POV level, thus reducing the risk of people
> >tweaking with them in external utilities - this will ensure better consistency
> >through out.
>
>   This makes sense for this project. Artifacts from some frames not being
> saved at the optimum quality setting will be less noticeable in an MPEG
> animation as compared to a single image.
>

Actually, this is where for the IMP I would like to avoid JPEG. Taking a source
image through one lossy compression before going through another often degrades the
final quality and/or increases the file sizes. In early work producing MPEGs, this
was one of the things that actually did matter. The cleaner the sources, the better
the MPEG, and JPEG was to be avoided.

At some point, one person mentioned that Antz used JPEG compression on their frames
before storage. Probably the main difference is that Antz was going out to film
recorders while the IMP's output is most likely going to go out to MPEG.

Post a reply to this message