3 ms·
> I certainly hope not. Not unless it is deterministic and much much higher quality. You're not comparing fairly. The author is intentionally using low-res im
by qarl 5mo ago
> I certainly hope not. Not unless it is deterministic and much much higher quality.
You're not comparing fairly. The author is intentionally using low-res images to illustrate how the compression works. You should compare these to, say, a JPEG compression at the same resolution and same bitrate. I think you'll find that this technique is quite an improvement to the compressions you already know and love.
- mrob 5mo agoJPEG has the great advantage that all JPEG artifacts look like JPEG artifacts. Newer codecs create artifacts that can be mistaken for part of the original image. That's a heavy price to pay for improved compression efficiency.
- drfloyd51 5mo agoYou’ve already chosen to go lossy. You can’t trust any pixel in the image to be true.