__/ [ [H]omer ] on Monday 12 March 2007 07:30 \__
> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>> JPEG2000 VS HD PHOTO
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Jpeg 2000 looks better at the same file size.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/stratovarious/417198416/
>
> Looking at the full sized picture, there do appear to be anomalies in
> the HD Photo version (artefacts in the hair, and blurring on the
> temple). How reliable the source is, or whether this was a bad
> conversion, I don't know.
>
> On paper (excuse the pun) HD Photo would appear to have superior specs,
> but unless it's a truly open format then I'm not interested. Mere "no
> fee" clauses don't impress me. Freeware is not Open Source, and
> corporate IP is not Open Standards either, no matter how much hype they
> pump out to convince us otherwise.
They'll probably add DRM support (read: _Microsoft_ CSS/DRM) as an HD
'extension'.
--
~~ Best wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Ping this IP, see if it collapses" --Windows TCP
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
8:05am up 16:08, 8 users, load average: 0.55, 0.64, 0.66
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
|
|
