[MCN-L] ye lode TIF vs. JPEG2000 debate
The Wellcome Library also have a JP2K Implementation Group which I am part of. I'll alert the facilitator of that group to this thread as see if she wants to contribute where the Wellcome are up to. Michael = Michael Stocking Managing Director Armadillo Systems 300 Kensal Road London W10 5BE +44 (0)20 8960 8600 michael at armadillosystems.com www.armadillosystems.com www.turningthepages.com http://digitalcultureonline.blogspot.com/ On 11 Mar 2010, at 19:14, Buckley, Robert R wrote: Hi Perian, Replacing your high-quality derivative TIFFs with JPEG 2000 may make sense now. It would save space, especially if one JPEG 2000 file can replace multiple derivative TIFFs. I don't know when you last looked at JPEG 2000, but interest in it continues to grow and more and more of that interest is being converted into action. Another response to your post mentioned the Wellcome Library Report; as far as I know, they are planning to go to the next step and implement the recommendations in the report and use JPEG 2000. NDNP has been using JPEG 2000 for three years now; they're up to 1.7M production master last time I looked, all encoded using JPEG 2000. Rob Buckley -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Perian Sully Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 6:12 PM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: [MCN-L] ye olde TIF vs. JPEG2000 debate Howdy everyone: I'm in the midst of reprocessing all (!!) of our image assets from .NEF (a RAW format) and I'm wondering if I should take another look at JPEG2000 now. When I first started imaging the collection, JPEG2000 was in its infancy and not widely adopted. As a result, I have my master files in NEF and TIF, my high-quality derivatives in TIF, and my accessible and web-ready images in JPG. Part of this reprocessing will including making new copies of the high-quality derivatives as well as the accessible JPGs. So I'm wondering if I should replace the HQ derivative TIFs with JPEG2000 at this time. Anyone have any opinions, experiences or suggestions before I commit to this? ~Perian Perian Sully Collections Information Manager Web Programs Strategist The Magnes 2911 Russell St. Berkeley, CA 94705 Work: 510-549-6950 x 357 Fax: 510-849-3673 http://www.magnes.org http://www.musematic.org http://www.mediaandtechnology.org ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/ ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/
[MCN-L] ye lode TIF vs. JPEG2000 debate
I don't know when you last looked at JPEG2000, but interest in it continues to grow and more and more of that interest is being converted into action. I feel a little skeptical about this. JPEG2000 has a lot of really wonderful features for high resolution still images, but it has been around for ten years now and has gained very little traction in the general computer imaging world. I don't know why this is, and I admit I don't know of any more broadly accepted competing openly documented format with similar features. But it says volumes that many of the marvelous web applications that might have been considered naturals for JPEG2000 are instead using other formats (think of things like Google Earth and Microsoft Photosynth and the really cool Gigapan). If JPEG2000 was really such a great solution I'd think it would be in much broader use with web apps that work with high-resolution photo data. Again, I'm not knocking anything about JPEG2000 in a technical sense - only that its support amongst the world of digital graphics is miniscule. It may be growing but not very quickly, given how much the digital graphics world has evolved in the last 10 years. My guess is that either something about JPEG 2000 will change substantially in the next few years or that it will be eclipsed by some other standard that will have similar features but for whatever reason will be more widely adopted. In either event, I'm in no hurry to switch to the current JPEG 2000 implementation. -Steve Rothman
[MCN-L] ye lode TIF vs. JPEG2000 debate
Hi Perian, Replacing your high-quality derivative TIFFs with JPEG 2000 may make sense now. It would save space, especially if one JPEG 2000 file can replace multiple derivative TIFFs. I don't know when you last looked at JPEG 2000, but interest in it continues to grow and more and more of that interest is being converted into action. Another response to your post mentioned the Wellcome Library Report; as far as I know, they are planning to go to the next step and implement the recommendations in the report and use JPEG 2000. NDNP has been using JPEG 2000 for three years now; they're up to 1.7M production master last time I looked, all encoded using JPEG 2000. Rob Buckley -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Perian Sully Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 6:12 PM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: [MCN-L] ye olde TIF vs. JPEG2000 debate Howdy everyone: I'm in the midst of reprocessing all (!!) of our image assets from .NEF (a RAW format) and I'm wondering if I should take another look at JPEG2000 now. When I first started imaging the collection, JPEG2000 was in its infancy and not widely adopted. As a result, I have my master files in NEF and TIF, my high-quality derivatives in TIF, and my accessible and web-ready images in JPG. Part of this reprocessing will including making new copies of the high-quality derivatives as well as the accessible JPGs. So I'm wondering if I should replace the HQ derivative TIFs with JPEG2000 at this time. Anyone have any opinions, experiences or suggestions before I commit to this? ~Perian Perian Sully Collections Information Manager Web Programs Strategist The Magnes 2911 Russell St. Berkeley, CA 94705 Work: 510-549-6950 x 357 Fax: 510-849-3673 http://www.magnes.org http://www.musematic.org http://www.mediaandtechnology.org ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/
