>On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 01:37:24PM +0100, Claus Cyrny wrote:
>> I have to admit that, after following this thread, I still
>> have no idea what Zhang Wei Wu means by 'lossless 'cropping'.
>> I understand' lossless compression', but cropping is by definition
>> lossy (you remove part of the original image), so I don't
>> know what 'lossless' means in this context.
>I'm going to take a wild guess on this (not having read the rest of
>the thread). If you were to take a lossy format (say, mp3 or jpeg),
>and cut out portions of the data and then recompresses the remaining
>data, the data that remains gets refiltered and suffers more loss
>than that just due to the data cropped out. On the other hand, both
>mp3 and jpeg support something that could be termed lossless cropping
>as long as you cut on the data boundaries (packet in mp3, 8x8 block on
>jpeg) where the data you crop out obviously gets thrown out, but the
>remaining data does not get refiltered with its resulting additional
Yes, that's it. When people talk about lossless jpeg modifications, in 99%
they are referring to "elimination of cumulative losses introduced by repeated
compression and decompression". (And the other 1% ... there is a kind of
JPG-based format that is lossless, but there is almost not support for it in
common applications and it has poor compression ratio and hence negates the
advantage of classic JPG).
Gimp-user mailing list