--- David Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry Harmanm, going to have to correct you here.
> JPEG is all about
> lossy, but 100% quality does retain all the detail
> in the image.
I did not know that 100% setting has 0% loss - always
thought that it was minimal but was always there
because there is always an exhibit of compression
(vis-a-vis a BMP), even at 100%.
Thanks for pointing that out. I was also trying to
make a point that a 100% JPEG should still be smaller
than the BMP - and your explanation would certainly
support that idea.
> I
> don't know how much people here know about Fourier
> transforms but
> basically a JPEG stores your image as a bunch of
> sine and cosine
> waves.
Yep the dreaded F/FTs, always a difficult but a
neccessary mathematical subject for me to grasp :-)
Thanks,
- Harman
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
