mfr3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Matthew F Ringel) (01/15/91)
A couple of days back, someone posted to alt.sex.pictures, with a picture that
was in (a uuencoded form of) JPEG compression. I downloaded the program used
to compress gifs like that, and I'm impressed (I've reclaimed at least 2.5
Megs so far). Does anyone think that this could become one of the new
standards for posting to alt.sex.pictures? Everyone seems to complain about
bandwidth, and, frankly, when you can store a 250K gif using 40-60K, that
solves a good part of the problem right there.
Questions? Comments? this seems like it might have very interesting
possibilities.
-Matt
}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{
Matthew F. Ringel {} Internet:mfr3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
Keep your hands on the knife...... {} ringel@close.cs.columbia.edu
..and your eyes on the hibachi {} Columbia University Football #1!cddukes@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER D DUKES) (01/16/91)
Yes and no, if I understand correctly jpeg works by zapping the color frequencies that you can't distinguish. This is all well and good if it wasn't for the minor problem that sometimes you wish to examine those frequencies (Quite often when first viewing a dark GIF, I'll play with the contrast until I can see everything. Then again it would cut down the amount of media I use for backups :-) -- cddukes@eos.ncsu.edu *OR* cddukes@eceugs.ece.ncsu.edu Chris.Dukes@f100.n151.z1.fidonet.org Phone Boam... Phone Boam. MD Phone Boam. (and for more insanity....)
fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) (01/16/91)
>>>>> On 15 Jan 91, mfr3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Matthew F Ringel) said:
Matthew> A couple of days back, someone posted to alt.sex.pictures,
Matthew> with a picture that was in (a uuencoded form of) JPEG
Matthew> compression. [...] Does anyone think that this could become one
Matthew> of the new standards for posting to alt.sex.pictures?
Using JPEG format for picture exchange would certainly be a good idea.
JPEG achieves effective compression and is (shortly) an international
standard. With the advent of JPEG implementations in hardware (C-Cube,
NeXTdimension), handling JPEG format will even be very effective.
JPEG is destined to be a major graphics format.
There are currently a number of problems, though:
1) JPEG can distort the the picture (slightly), i.e. the picture is
not guaranteed to be the same when unpacked. The effect is minor for
small degrees of compression (<*25), but it might still be a problem in
some cases (for alt.sex.pictures you wouldn't mind, of course :-).
2) If we are to use JPEG as the standard for exchange, we must all
have a JPEG compatible program, either a viewer or as a JPEG2GIF
program. There should be JPEG programs for all common platforms (and
even for a few of the more arcane, such as the IBM PC). This implies
that source for such programs must be available -- the JPEG program
posted recently was a PC binary, if I'm not mistaken. Also, JPEG
programs must be freely available to all -- the JPEG program posted
was a *shareware* -- as we cannot use a image standard that will cost
us all $$$. People are simply not going to use it.
So, the idea of using JPEG as a USENET image standard is fine, if a
bit premature. In a few years time, when freely distributeable, no
cost, source code JPEG software is available, I suspect it will be
exactly what we will do. In the meantime ....
Oh, I haven't checked recently -- will JPEG be in the next release of
PBM?
/Lars
--
Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk | Life is hard, and then you die.
CS Dept., Univ. of Aalborg, DENMARK. | - The Immaterialmcastle@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu (Mike Castle (Nexus)) (01/16/91)
In article <1991Jan15.061755.24549@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> mfr3@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Matthew F Ringel) writes: >A couple of days back, someone posted to alt.sex.pictures, with a picture that >was in (a uuencoded form of) JPEG compression. I downloaded the program used >to compress gifs like that, and I'm impressed (I've reclaimed at least 2.5 >Megs so far). Does anyone think that this could become one of the new >standards for posting to alt.sex.pictures? Everyone seems to complain about > Questions? Comments? this seems like it might have very interesting >possibilities. > -Matt First: This should have been posted to alt.sex.pictures.d Thank you. Second: There is a group of people (gathered from a.s.p and comp.graphics) who are working on their own versions of PD software to handle jpeg files. They all got together sometime around last November (can't exactly remember when) with the intent of making jpeg the standard for archiving and transfer (ie posting). This has been well documented in several newsgroups. Btw, I expect their version to be what will become the standard, for a couple of reasons. 1: Several well know big names like Jef Poskanzer of pbmplus fame, David Read who volunteered to moderate a newsgroup for all types of images (haven't seen much discussion lately, when's voting start?), someone from Stone Soup Group (I believe Lee Crocker who wrote Piclab, but not sure). 2: It will be public domain (actually, more free-ware along the same lines as the X windows standards or FSF Gnu copy rights) and therefore free (the Image Alchemy posted to a.s.p is $80 for registration, and is cripple-ware). Anyway, I think I'm going to wait a while before I start switching my 40Megs or so of .gif files over to anything else. Just a novices opinions. -- Mike Castle (Nexus) S087891@UMRVMA.UMR.EDU (preferred) | ERROR: Invalid mcastle@mcs213k.cs.umr.edu (unix mail-YEACH!)| command 'HELP' Life is like a clock: You can work constantly, and be right | try 'HELP' all the time, or not work at all, and be right twice a day. |
mccool@dgp.toronto.edu (Michael McCool) (01/23/91)
mcastle@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu (Mike Castle (Nexus)) writes: >There is a group of people (gathered from a.s.p and comp.graphics) >who are working on their own versions of PD software to handle jpeg files. How about that! Another justification to give to system administrators for a.s.p. I reminds me of the way public email systems (ALEX in Canada, something else in France) get most of their revenue from, um, "earthy" pursuits, thus providing a system which can be used for more cerebral traffic. Michael.