4 ms·
~~I obviously don't know enough about images... Why would you store this as a jpg and not a LOSELESS format?~~ The full resolution image is in the comments, it
by gppk 8y ago
~~I obviously don't know enough about images... Why would you store this as a jpg and not a LOSELESS format?~~
The full resolution image is in the comments, it's uploaded small because of Reddit
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lGDV6jOHc0v5UdkxcqYShqhKBz_UijPl/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lGDV6jOHc0v5UdkxcqYShqhKBz_...
- sureaboutthis 8y ago> LOSELESS Lossless
- wongarsu 8y agoyou lose less with a lossless codec
- sureaboutthis 8y agoI'm glad you didn't write "loose less".
- Asooka 8y agoWell, a lossless codec loses less information and so it's less loose with the pixel data :)
- aerophilic 8y agoAssuming “lossless”, the main reason is you don’t want to “lose” information. For example, if someone wanted to actually use this picture to geo-reference (or would it be Lunar-reference =p) a particular reference a particular feature, you would want it to be accurate. Specific use case: you found some ice, and want to know exactly where it was, as well as composition. If you didn’t use a lossless format, you wouldn’t have confidence it wasn’t as artifact of the compression. Edit: misstated Leo instead of lunar, Leo is low earth orbit