> Also.. I assume you must be
> using jpg, since you talk about the need for a large image to compensate
> for lossyness. My advice.. don't use jpg. Try PNG instead. JPG was never
> intended to handle detailed images that where not converted from photos
> (close to 3000x2000 pixels or more minimum), where the loss of detail is
> barely noticeable.

Ooo, no no NO... That's the point: It *is* PNG, *not* JPEG; the pattern has
to repeat exactly for the 3D effect to work, and JPEG would screw that up
totally. That's why the files are so dam big - they're probably much smaller
with JPEG. But hey, what use is a sterogram that doesn't *work*? ;-)

> The fact that they insist on using jpg or similar lossy formats for
> digital cameras I find completely insane and it isn't all that great for
> rendering either, unless you specifically need to save space. In the case
> of stereograms it is almost certain to be lethal.

Yeah, I know... (But then, *my* digital camera is so lame it probably
doesn't make any odds. *sigh*) And it would kill the sterograms.

Thanks.
Andrew.

Post a reply to this message