On Mon, 06 Aug 2001 22:01:28 -0400 Jim Snyder ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > ZIP works by actually packing the data into "empty space". As a result, > the > size does not vary as much, but is lossy. AFAIK Zip and LZW (as found in compressed TIFF) are fundamentally the same algorithms. Neither are lossy, both substitute shorthand codes for recurring patterns of data. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
- filmscanners: (anti)compression? Tomasz Zakrzewski
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Jim Snyder
- RE: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Frank Paris
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Tony Sleep
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Robert Logan
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? RogerMillerPhoto
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Steve Greenbank
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Robert E. Wright
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Lynn Allen
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? RogerMillerPhoto
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? Robert Meier
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? geoff murray
- Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression? RogerMillerPhoto