SCIART-L Archives

SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration-

SCIART-L@LISTSERV.NEBRASKA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender:
SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration- <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Britt Griswold <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 23 Feb 1998 13:28:22 -0500
In-Reply-To:
<l03102801b1174a749d91@[205.232.8.215]>
MIME-version:
1.0
Reply-To:
SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration- <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
>>>
>THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE, IF YOU ARE GETTING DISTORTIONS THEN YOU HAVE A
>BUM COMPRESSION PROGRAM.
><<
>
>That's right Britt. LZW may have had some implementation issues from
>differing vendors. But the compression itself is considered "lossless",
>meaning that what goes in comes out.
>
>BTW I understand that LZW works by mapping out redundant pixels (ie. all
>the white ones, black ones, etc) rather than altering any individual
>pixels. Certainly any jpeg style artifacts are the result of poor
>programing or worse. The above should point out why LZW is not consistant
>with the resulting file size. Files with line work will benefit the most,
>while images with lots of complex details may not reduce much at all.
>
>Frank

I have actually seen file sizes increase when an image ia especially grainy!
Britt

Britt Griswold
Graphics And Publications
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Code 253  Bldg. 8  Rm. N15
Greenbelt, MD 20771

(301) 286-3381
(301) 286-1705 (FAX)
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2