hp0p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hokkun Pang) (02/05/91)
i came across this strange result a while ago. >dir pic.gif => 287K 100% >lharc pic.gif => 277K 96% >gif2bmp pic.gif => 307K >lharc pic.bmp => 241K 84% so, thru conversion and compression, the gif file reduced to 84% of original. i also obtained similar results for other gifs and pkzip. so, what is being compressed here?
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (02/07/91)
In article <4bffFVW00XYKI3J0UA@andrew.cmu.edu> hp0p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hokkun Pang) writes: | i came across this strange result a while ago. | >lharc pic.bmp => 241K 84% | so, thru conversion and compression, the gif file reduced to 84% of original. | i also obtained similar results for other gifs and pkzip. so, what is being | compressed here? No, the gif file doesn't seem to have been compressed, the bitmap file does. GIF files are already compressed, while a bitmap isn't. This allows the compressors, like zip or arc, to work on the raw data. The new alt.comp.compression may carry discussions of stuff like this. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me