> About JPEG,
>
> Is JPEG that good? It seems beaut for photos, but I've saved files in JPG
> of geometric designs (Flags, plain colours, sharp edges), but when opening
> the file later it seemed like a bad analogue TV reception! -- with
> ghosting of the line edges, and colour washing. You would think
> compressing of plain geometric shapes, of say only 5 colours total, would
> be easy. I tried saving with maximum quality (LView Pro, PC), but that
> made no difference. Whats going on here? GIF seemed to compress just as
> well but with no errors. Plus it decompresses faster.
As stated before, JPEG is meant for photographs! In those pictures real sharp
well-defined edges are not so important. I believe JPEG is a
Fourier-transformation of the original picture. Therefore: lots of CPU time to
(de)compress it, you lose some of the original bitmap information. But the
advantages: the compression rate is very high, and for photographs the loss of
information is not detectable.
By the way, the JPEG viewer for MSX (JLD.COM) is not perfect... The colours
are very strange sometimes...
So I recommend to use JPG only for >8 bit photographs, where it was made for.
(So, not really useful for V9938, but maybe for screen 8 pics it is useful)
Grtjs, Manuel
PS: MSX 4 EVER! (Questions? See: http://www.faq.msxnet.org)
PPS: Visit my homepage at http://www.sci.kun.nl/marie/home/manuelbi
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
