3 ms·
Oh, interesting. I always thought JPEG2000 failed to catch on mainly because of patent encumbrances, not for quality reasons.
by aesthesia 6y ago
Oh, interesting. I always thought JPEG2000 failed to catch on mainly because of patent encumbrances, not for quality reasons.
- zrav 6y agoYes, that didn't help of course. JPEG2000 was a bit more efficient than JPEG by virtue of being a newer, more computationally intensive format, not because of wavelets. A modern format like the h.265 derived HEIF still uses DCT/DST based transforms. For video the situation is worse, as AFAIK no-one has been able to come up with a decent wavelet based motion estimation algorithm.