On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 09:42:22AM -0400, Al Tobey wrote: > Here's the idea: would it be beneficial to convert a texture to a > low-quality jpeg, then back again to take advantage of some of the > inherent lossiness? It, in theory, should reduce the size of the > texture without effecting the bit depth and shouldn't require a ton of > code to get working (use libjpeg). I don't forsee a big problem > performance wise if the textures are mangled during the loading stage, > but I'm still learning ...
Wha...? Let me get this straight. You're suggesting that when an OpenGL user calls glTexImage?D with GL_COMPRESSED_* as the internal format to compress the image as a JPEG. Then, when the texture is used, decompress the texture and upload the uncompressed image (since no card that I know of can work directly with a JPEG as a texture) to the card? It's an interesting idea, BUT unless you can get help from the card decompressing the JPEG on upload (perhaps the Radeon iDCT unit could help?) -or- you come up with some sort of blazing fast, hand-tuned, assembly-coded JPEG decoder, the performance will sink faster than the Titanic...and will rot at the bottom of the ocean for just as long. :) Hmmm...I wonder if the fragment shader units on modern cards could be used to do a VRAM-to-VRAM decompression of such a texture...hmm...I still think the performance would be horrible, though. -- Tell that to the Marines! _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
