source geo-aware JP2 solution.
-mpg
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
François-Olivier Devaux
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 1:50 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss]
you have any
benchmark data you can share?)
-mpg
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
François-Olivier Devaux
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 12:47 AM
To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
IMO:
Michael,
>
> If you're using ERMapper (ECW) files now, you're already deep into the
> world of lossy transforms.
We're not routinely using ecw as a definitive storage solution. ERMapper
grid format is used though.
Thanks for the kind offer to encode some data. I may take you up on it
l
for you still holds :-)
-mpg
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 2:12 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless'
IMO:
Michael,
Again, I don't pretend to be an expert on JPEG2000. However, I'd like to
know more about the format for future reference.
Does the wiki article at the following URL represent a good overview of
the format?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_2000
If it is accurate, there is a
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 7:39 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
IMO:
Michael,
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 12:47 AM
> To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
>
> Hi,
>
> Norman Vine has pointed to me this discussion about JPEG 2000, and I
> thought it might be interesting to give you a small overvie
Hi,
Norman Vine has pointed to me this discussion about JPEG 2000, and I
thought it might be interesting to give you a small overview on JPEG
2000 and present the OpenJPEG library on which we are working.
FIELDS WHERE JPEG 2000 IS USED
JPEG 2000 is becoming the reference in image co
IMO:
Michael,
Thanks for the comments on this thread.
I've had a couple of private emails expressing interest in the outcome, so
I'll continue this conversation in public, rather than moving it offline.
One of the problems that I have is that I understand that JPEG 2000 can be
'lossy' or 'n
Michael P. Gerlek writes:
>
> Someday I'd like to try and open a dialog with the OpenJP2 developers
> about this topic, but last I heard they were completely
> uninterested in supporting GB-sized datasets.
>
Michael
H . Maybe the time is right :-)
http://groups.google.com/group/openjp
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:26:16PM -0500, Ed McNierney wrote:
> Christopher -
>
> Let me add the "evidence" that I have found that reducing the strip size
> in LZW-compressed GeoTIFFs has, not surprisingly, a VERY large effect on
> read performance - about a factor of 10 in the particular cases I
5, 2008 9:18 PM
To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:04:59PM -0500, Ed McNierney wrote:
> Christopher -
>
> You will very likely find that using different LZW compression options
(particularly setting a small str
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:04:59PM -0500, Ed McNierney wrote:
> Christopher -
>
> You will very likely find that using different LZW compression options
> (particularly setting a small strip size) will slightly degrade compression
> performance while significantly improving read time. While I t
ebruary 25, 2008 8:57 PM
To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 04:31:34PM -0800, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> Yup: Kakadu is not Open Source, as per the OSI definition of the term.
> The only FOSS package I know of is OpenJ
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 04:31:34PM -0800, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> Yup: Kakadu is not Open Source, as per the OSI definition of the term.
> The only FOSS package I know of is OpenJpeg2000 (or something like
> that); unfortunately, however, it is not suitable for geo-sized imagery
> last time I lo
ED] On Behalf Of
> Christopher Schmidt
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 10:18 AM
> To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:27:22AM -0800, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> > Bruce-
> >
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:27:22AM -0800, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> Bruce-
>
> Again, I'm not sure how to convince you of this... JP2 is inherently
> lossless just like GeoTIFF is; what arguments do you / would you find
> persuaive to use GeoTIFF? (alternatively, what do you use now that you
>
a bit
esoteric for the rest of the OSGeo crowd]
-mpg
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 2:19 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss]
Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
Bruce-
It is not clear to me what sort of "study" you would need to convince
you, as the ISO standard for encoding data into the JPEG-2000 file
format is by construction mathematically and numerically lossless
process. (Indeed, "compression", i.e. throwing away bits
IMO:
Michael,
My concern as a custodian of significant image resources is to ensure that
the integrity of this data is protected and available for future
analytical use by ourselves and by the public.
As an example, to conduct multi-temporal analysis of 'imagery' to help
understand big pictu
o: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
IMO:
Thanks for the reply Traian,
I don't mean to be dismissive of this report, but I was hoping
for something more definitive to prove th
See also the FIF formats from the late 1990s, there was at least on
validated system using that fractal information format / f image f
that was released publicly before the terrorist american nsa jacked
the patents and disappeared the company. Files were even deleted by
"authority" from one of my b
__
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:57 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] 'lossless' JPEG2000
IMO:
Thanks for the reply Traian,
I don't mean to be dismissive of thi
IMO:
Thanks for the reply Traian,
I don't mean to be dismissive of this report, but I was hoping for
something more definitive to prove that 'lossless' JPEG compressions did
indeed protect the integrity of the data..
Perhaps its just my ignorance, but I was hoping for something along the
li
24 matches
Mail list logo
