3 ms·
It seemed like most of their issues were due to the lossy compression (ie wanting different parameters per sub-image). If they had opted for lossless JPEG XL wo
by fc417fc802 2y ago
It seemed like most of their issues were due to the lossy compression (ie wanting different parameters per sub-image). If they had opted for lossless JPEG XL wouldn't things have "just worked"?
Unrelated, I'd also be curious to know how their initial data transformation varies from that of your TIFF scheme.
- rurban 2y agoThe jxl compression would compute a base for all sub-images and create better diffs amongst them. The current encoder doesn't support that yet. With my tiff lzw:2 it only takes the diffs for 2 consecutive lines per each sub-image, which is a shame. But still 50% compression. With jxl it would compress down to 10% or more with a sub-image base.
- JyrkiAlakuijala 2y agoLossy compression can be megabytes vs. tens or hundreds of megabytes per image kind of question, i.e., worth all the sweat it brings.