Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[filmscanners] RE: JPEG2000 > Paul
>-----Original Message-----
>From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
>
>But I don't object to regular JPEG for web images, because they're usually
>small, and viewed on uncalibrated monitors anyway, so who cares?
The good thing about j2k is that one image file can represent multiple
resolutions, quality levels, etc. So if you are hosting a website you can
first send a lower resolution image and then improve the quality and size of
the image without having to resend the data. You could also start with one
locality and then add more to the picture. This is much more advanced then
with jpeg. I am confident that within a few years j2k will overtake jpeg
although the later is much faster.
Robert
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
|
