Re: [CinePaint] jpg worse
Rob Lingelbach <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.video.cinepaint.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mar 14, 2008, at 9:35 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > the artifacts will become more apparent. > That is why saving to JPEG should be the last step. understood. > The biggest problems noticed with JPEG compression are for non- > natural computer > renderings with sharp features such as text. isn't text via computer generation a sharpness test- or are live- action text images more prone to JPEG compression artifacts? > Digital cameras with the Foveon sensor > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor) are quite > interesting since > they entirely avoid the artifacts caused by "Bayer" compression. Close > inspection of images produced by the Foveon sensor shows > considerably more > precise detail. The complete lack of distortion down to the pixel > level (other > than contributed by the lense) is a bit startling. this is the first time in 2 years or so I've heard mention of the Foveon sensor and its implementations. Has it caught on, are there already or soon arriving consumer/pro Foveon cameras that will compete favorably? We talked about this on the TIG in 2002, see http://tig.colorist.org/mailman/htdig/tig/2002-November/001722.html and do a search on the TIG archives for Foveon to see more feedback. regards Rob > -- Rob Lingelbach [email protected] http://www.colorist.org/robhome.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/