>>I believe the PNG graphics format does that. I'm not sure because I don't >>use that format (pretty much no one does) and, like GIF, it's supposedly >>not very well suited to photographic images.
Not true. JS> The PNG format does support up to 48-bit truecolor or 16-bit grayscale, JS> with lossless compression. In addition, a complete color management system JS> (sRGB) is supported. It is not the most convenient format for publishing JS> since a typical PUG entry would be around 500 kB in size. Also, it is much better than TIFF for archiving purposes (lossless compression), as it achieves much higher compression. My average photograph compressed in PNG at highest (lossless) compression was only 65% size of LZW compression TIFF, and still was just 80% size of ZIP compression TIFF! That's quite better, isn't it? Only drawback is that most implementation of PNG compression are pretty slow at the highest setting, about 2-3x slower than TIFF LZW save (not a problem with current computers, though, but my box is from 1997). So give PNG a chance :) BTW, I really don't understand why digicam makers don't implement wavelet-type compression instead of jpeg compression. The wavelets were much better with image quality and size (one third size at same quality as jpeg or much better quality at same size as jpeg) two or three years ago already... Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
