On 12/19/07, Polyhead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:11:13 -0800 > "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> >I also refuse to use jpeg, png or nothing. > > >> > > >> Wow. That's bizarre. > > > > > > Hardly, jpeg is lossy compression. It grabs a square of pixels and > > > averages them, you lose both dynamic range and resolution with > > > jpeg. PNG is lossless and opensource. The other problem with jpeg > > > is that because of the way it handles compression, it chokes on > > > film grain. There isn't a way to feed a jpeg encoder a image with > > > allot of film grain and have it spit out a reasonable result. > > > People use it because they just don't know any better. > > > > You're talking about displaying photographs on the internet, which is meant > > to be a way of sharing information quickly and easily. Image compression > > quality takes a back seat most of the time around here, and no one else > > seems to be complaining about it. > > > > Your elitist attitude is grating. If you really don't care about what > > others think of your photos, why bother posting them in the first place? > > I thought they may enjoy it, I was wrong, instead they looked for something > to complain about. Typical of the bulk of people really.
I've got more bandwidth than God when I'm at work. I work for the company formerly known as UUNET. I've got straight 100MB Full-Duplex connections directly to the alter.net backbone. Your site is still too slow. PNG is NOT a format for rendering photographic output. If fact you probably couldn't have picked a worse format (Well, GIF, but it's got all the bad points of PNG with the addition of patent encumbrance). JPEG is the only commonly supported graphics format suited to web display of photographic images. Yes, it does have some bad points, but a max quality JPEG with smaller, lower-quality thumbnails will produce similar quality output (visually indistinguishable for the full-size image) with far better page render speeds (because your thumbnail's won't be 20x the size they need to be). -Adam Who did know M68K assembly back in the day. But hasn't used it in a decade. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
