-Andrew
___
/ __|__ Cottonwood BBS
/ / |_/ +1 (951) 242-3593
\ \__|_\ Open 24/7 at 300/1200/2400 baud
\___| http://hometown.aol.com/cottonwoodbbs
"KilrPilr" <commod...@removehotmail.com> escreveu na mensagem
news:D0exh.874783$1T2.842690@pd7urf2no...
"Andrew Wiskow" <wis...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:PUpxh.346$384.265@trnddc05...
-GM
On 2/4/2007 2:18 PM, KilrPilr wrote:
> You are welcome. Yes it took awhile to do. Prolly 7 hours altogether and I
> had to compress the heck out of it to make the archive a decent size (it
> started out at 48MB's ) but I think its still all legible and worthy. :)
>
>
> "Andrew Wiskow" <> wrote in message
"gamemaster" <gamemast...@hotmailnull.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xgrxh.2511$Oc.1...@news1.epix.net...
> You are welcome. Yes it took awhile to do. Prolly 7 hours altogether and I
> had to compress the heck out of it to make the archive a decent size (it
> started out at 48MB's ) but I think its still all legible and worthy. :)
Thanks!
How small does it compress if you use PNG compression for the pages instead?
That would help with the legibility, but will hopefully still compress well
(lots of white space on the page)
Well I can't say for this particular set of images but in general jpg is
a much tighter compression because it "throws" away unused (generally
unseen) bits This is why it is called "lossy" and why you don't want to
save to jpg as you are working on it as it will continue to degrade with
each save as more bits are thrown away. PNG is by comparison "lossless"
so since it keeps all of its data as the original (as a zip file will
do) it will be larger than a jpg of the same image.
-GM
> On 2/5/2007 10:01 AM, Leif Bloomquist wrote:
>> How small does it compress if you use PNG compression for the pages instead?
>> That would help with the legibility, but will hopefully still compress well
>> (lots of white space on the page)
>>
>
> Well I can't say for this particular set of images but in general jpg is
> a much tighter compression because it "throws" away unused (generally
> unseen) bits
But it also introduces some really ugly block artifacts. For pure b/w
source material TIFF with CCITT Group4 compression is a good choice.
Lossless and usually better compression than PNG. That compression
algorithm was developed for FAX.
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
I tried to hit you up for the 48 meg archive via dcc last weekened but
did not get a chance to grab it from you.. Hope to see you tonight to get
it.
Jeremy supercommodoreatmaildotcom