CompuServe Thread

#New Imagemaster!

11 messages in this thread
#192196From: Jim SakladApr 11, 1995 9:47 PM
> PNG … offers outstanding _lossless_ compression for 24-bit images,… Roughly how much compression, Ben? jsaklad@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu . . JimDoc, on AutoPilot
#192249From: Black Belt SystemsApr 12, 1995 12:51 PM
Jim, As with all file formats, compression varies wildly with the source material. Let me put it to you this way; our own TRIM format runs 25%-75% better than commonly used image formats; PNG is in the same range. Changing a 100 mb directory of IFF24 to TRIM saved me about 60 MB; you can expect the same performance from PNG, and again, I emphasize that this is a lossless methodology, unlike the evil JPEG. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#192312From: Paul IdolApr 12, 1995 10:16 PM
Ben, what about lossless JPEG? Mr. Zombie
#192455From: Black Belt SystemsApr 14, 1995 1:39 AM
Paul… "What about lossless JPEG?" Uh, ok, what about it? –Ben …via AutoPilot
#192464From: Paul IdolApr 14, 1995 1:52 AM
Ben, you say JPEG is evil because of its lossiness–and I agree that lossy compression, as a general storage and presentation tool is awful, although for some applications the kind of compression you can only achieve with lossiness is necessary–but JPEG offers a lossless mode. I've never experimented to see how good its compression is, though. Mr. Zombie
#192685From: Black Belt SystemsApr 15, 1995 7:33 PM
Aha… I just couldn't figure out what you were wanting me to address… JPEG's lossless compression mode is similar to one of the PNG modes, and it's not too bad, actually. Dunno if anyone actually ever implemented it, though. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#192492From: Eduard JosephApr 14, 1995 1:13 PM
Ben, Does Win-Images (and for MY personal use) capable of creating lossless JPEG? Eduard Joseph
#192686From: Black Belt SystemsApr 15, 1995 7:34 PM
Eduard, No, WinImages doesn't create lossless JPEG. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#192314From: Jim SakladApr 12, 1995 10:28 PM
> Let me put it to you this way; our own TRIM format runs 25%-75% better > than commonly used image formats; PNG is in the same range. The only thing I did NOT like about your TRIM format was that no one but you seemed to know about it. It will be nice to have a universal lossless format like PNG that everyone and his brother supports. > Changing a 100 mb directory of IFF24 to TRIM saved me about 60 MB; you > can expect the same performance from PNG Now, THAT'S what I like to hear!! jsaklad@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu . . JimDoc, on AutoPilot
#192456From: Black Belt SystemsApr 14, 1995 1:39 AM
Jim, We never did release the TRIM format… that's why no one else had it. We had it on Amiga and under Windows and NT, though. I'm sure that PNG will do an admirable job of serving many people's image needs. We're eagerly awaiting source code. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#192508From: Anthony RamirezApr 14, 1995 3:29 PM
<The only thing I did NOT like about your TRIM format was that no one but you seemed to know about it. It will be nice to have a universal lossless format like PNG that everyone and his brother supports.> I agree. This is the same reason why I don't use TRIMs. If someone would make a DataType for it at least some programs could access TRIM files.