visually lossless

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Raymond Lauzzana: "Re: Image database/ RE: Huffman encode (FAX-style) encryption and"
• Previous message: Tony Barry: "Re: More digital resolution"
• Next in thread: Cynthia Frazier: "Re: visually lossless"

Message-Id: <mailto:199408271310.IAA24691@library.wustl.edu>
Date:         Sat, 27 Aug 1994 09:05:11 -0400
From: Howard Besser 514939-7000 or 510642-2231 <mailto:howard@CCA.QC.CA>
Subject:      visually lossless
To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB <mailto:IMAGELIB@ARIZVM1.BITNET>

Though I think thatthe "visually lossless" idea is an interesting way
to look at the lossy/lossless problem, any discussion of lossless
must be qualified by how the image will be displayed.  As
Robert MacKimmie pointed out, an image that looks good (visually
lossless) as a fullscreen image may look horrible (very lossy)
when you zoom in on it.  Likewise, an image that appears visually
lossless on the screen may look very lossy when printed out.  I really
think that any discussion of loss must keep in mind the potential
uses of the image.

• Next message: Raymond Lauzzana: "Re: Image database/ RE: Huffman encode (FAX-style) encryption and"
• Previous message: Tony Barry: "Re: More digital resolution"
• Next in thread: Cynthia Frazier: "Re: visually lossless"