Re: The weakest link?
I believe the PNG graphics format does that. I'm not sure because I don't use that format (pretty much no one does) and, like GIF, it's supposedly not very well suited to photographic images. Not true. JS The PNG format does support up to 48-bit truecolor or 16-bit grayscale, JS with lossless compression. In addition, a complete color management system JS (sRGB) is supported. It is not the most convenient format for publishing JS since a typical PUG entry would be around 500 kB in size. Also, it is much better than TIFF for archiving purposes (lossless compression), as it achieves much higher compression. My average photograph compressed in PNG at highest (lossless) compression was only 65% size of LZW compression TIFF, and still was just 80% size of ZIP compression TIFF! That's quite better, isn't it? Only drawback is that most implementation of PNG compression are pretty slow at the highest setting, about 2-3x slower than TIFF LZW save (not a problem with current computers, though, but my box is from 1997). So give PNG a chance :) BTW, I really don't understand why digicam makers don't implement wavelet-type compression instead of jpeg compression. The wavelets were much better with image quality and size (one third size at same quality as jpeg or much better quality at same size as jpeg) two or three years ago already... Good light, Frantisek Vlcek - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The weakest link?
Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: [Image file formats with color management data included.] I believe the PNG graphics format does that. I'm not sure because I don't use that format (pretty much no one does) and, like GIF, it's supposedly not very well suited to photographic images. The PNG format does support up to 48-bit truecolor or 16-bit grayscale, with lossless compression. In addition, a complete color management system (sRGB) is supported. It is not the most convenient format for publishing since a typical PUG entry would be around 500 kB in size. -- http://members.chello.nl/~j.schoone\\|// Registered Linux user #78364 - The Linux Counter - http://counter.li.org Assume nothing, expect anything. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: The weakest link?
Now, if we could get together and buy a good monitor calibration package, we could send it around and all get our monitors calibrated. Probably wouldn't work for all of us, though. The kind I mean isn't just software but includes a colorimeter, too. Len --- -Original Message- From: Dan Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 10:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: The weakest link? My faithful monitor, a 6+ year old NEC XV17+, excited its last electron a week or so a go. I've been making do with my wife's mid-level pc since then (sometimes shifting her monitor to my Mac), but it isn't the same. Text and graphics on her 17 are crisp and clear, but some photos in various web galleries are now very blah-- but were quite nice viewed on my old monitor. I've just realized I can pick my lens/film/paper trying to achieve a certain look (with limited success, but the process is fun). What I can't anticipate or control, it seems, is how well that image will travel to other viewers. Very frustrating. When my new monitor comes, I should be happy with what I'm seeing (once again). Though I'm not sure I'll be very confident that other people are seeing what I am. Dan Scott (aarg.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: The weakest link?
Patrick White wrote: Dan Scott wrote: (sometimes shifting her monitor to my Mac), but it isn't the same. Text and graphics on her 17 are crisp and clear, but some photos in various web galleries are now very blah-- but were quite nice viewed on my old monitor. snip One of these days, some bright person will get around to designing a popular image encoding format that stores the image data and the gamma that that data was encoded with. Then machines that know they use a different gamma can adjust the pixel values to give a close approximation of what the original image was supposed to look like. I believe the PNG graphics format does that. I'm not sure because I don't use that format (pretty much no one does) and, like GIF, it's supposedly not very well suited to photographic images. As far as the monitor quality issue raised by the original poster, you might also want to check that the PC in question is set for 24-bit or 32-bit true color rather than 16-bit high color. The difference isn't obvious with a lot of images, but is *very* apparent with others. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The weakest link?
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 11:35:27 -0800, Patrick White wrote: One of these days, some bright person will get around to designing a popular image encoding format that stores the image data and the gamma that that data was encoded with. TIFF can do that, but very few TIFF writers put gamma data in. Probably since there's no way to get it programmatically on a PC (there may be on a Mac or other platforms) that stands any reasonable chance of accuracy. Then machines that know they use a different gamma can adjust the pixel values to give a close approximation of what the original image was supposed to look like. I believe that Photoshop will attempt to match the gamma curve of your monitor or printer with that of a TIFF image (that includes gamma information). TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: The weakest link?
On Wednesday, November 28, 2001, at 02:35 PM, Patrick White wrote: This makes the images produced on a Mac appear too light (or is it too dark?) on PCs. Basically, there are three apropaches to dealing with this: 1) make it look goon on a Mac and forget about the PC users, 2) make it look good on PCs and forget about the Mac users, 3) make it look slightly crappy on both PCs and Macs and, well, live with the crappiness. Or option 4, when preparing images for the web, convert them to use the sRGB color profile and embed the profile in the image. This does two things: sRGB is basically a crude approximation of your typical PeeCee color display so it will look reasonable when Windows users view it. Mac users using Internet Exploder (or OmniWeb on MacOS X) will will have the image automatically corrected by ColorSync to match their monitor configuration regardless of what gamma they choose. (Well, in IE you have to turn colorsync on in preferences, then the correction is automatic.) One of these days, some bright person will get around to designing a popular image encoding format that stores the image data and the gamma that that data was encoded with. Already done. You can embed ICC profiles in jpeg and tiff files. -john - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
