Re: Re: Pictures

Jernej Simon=E8i=E8 wrote:
> Hello Holger,
> =20
> 4. september 2002, 12:56:04, you wrote:
>=20
>=20
>>The current w3d code performs on single frames about as well as the JPE=
G=20
>>plugin of GIMP. Artifacts are different, but compression ratios at=20
>>acceptable image qualities are comparable. (So the answer is yes;)
>=20
>=20
> How about making a lossy image format - this would make sense now that
> some company wants to collect money on the JPEG patent
> <http://www.burnalljpegs.org/>...

Hmm, DjVu (djvu.sourceforge.net) is much more advanced and provides some
very nice features for image and document compression and performs much
better than JPEG. Take a look on this, if someone starts to write an=20
encoder plugin for GIMP it should be the easiest way to go. And you can=20
wrap this codec into an OGG stream, too.

The licence issues concerning the AT&T patents about some parts of this=20
codec are cleared I think. Take a look on their project page for details.=


For video compression this codec is ways too complicated and slow, here=20
you will need a simpler approach.

Holger

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to '[email protected]'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.