PDA

View Full Version : JPEG on the way out



Chris Keall
12-03-2007, 09:54 AM
Rival format details here (http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf/feature/F60FA69068057B5CCC25729B00724F12).

Greg
12-03-2007, 11:33 AM
Importantly though will it be able to be viewed in a browser?

mejobloggs
12-03-2007, 12:07 PM
If it will be as widely supported as jpeg, then I am definately looking forward to it.

johnd
12-03-2007, 09:04 PM
So is MS up to it's old tricks i.e. is this format going to be proprietory so that only MS users can utilize the format? If so, I would suggest that in today's environment where open-ness is becoming more the norm, it is a dead duck?

winmacguy
12-03-2007, 10:03 PM
Currently both Adobe- Lightroom , Apple-Aperture and all major camera manufacturers support the RAW format which is an open standards high Def camera image format widely used by professional photographers world wide so I would agree with johnd.

A raw i

R2x1
12-03-2007, 10:48 PM
I would trust MS implicitly, just like I would trust a concrete life jacket.

I suspect the purpose of both JPG and this MS flim-flammery is to give compressed files. RAW is not too hot at this.

Chilling_Silence
12-03-2007, 11:01 PM
This format has been around a while now, I saw previews of this format & a picture using it (when compared with JPG & PNG) in like April / May last year...

Still not _officially_ an open format from what I undertand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_Photo#Licensing

winmacguy
12-03-2007, 11:02 PM
Very true R2x1, I think MS just likes its own input everywhere. I don't see anything wrong with the jpeg format in its current form for sending files over the web that are only going to be for personal and person to person use which I assume is what the new Microsoft format is designed for. Generally if your wanting to send print quality image files to a printer or designer there are other higher quality image formats already in use that are perfectly sufficient as are the methods of sending them.

Murray P
13-03-2007, 12:36 AM
Winmacguy. RAW data is not an open file format per se. Try using any old converter without the correct plugin and it won't work because most camera manufacturers use a proprietary sensor which require different algorithms to process and interpret, some do process the RAW data to some extent which means it is no longer strictly speaking RAW data.

Have a look at Open RAW - The RAW Problem (http://www.openraw.org/info). Well worth a cruise around. I hope they get there.


Anywho, JPEG is getting a bit tired and JPEG-2000 hasn't really taken off for whatever reason, possibly because it is reliant on patents, and this newish MS offering looks pretty handy. But, I'd think twice before trusting my images to an MS format, then decide not to (can you see MS wanting me to HD Photo in Linux?). Perhaps for much the same reasons that JPEG-2000 hasn't made great inroads in to image file format, JPEG is universally accepted and doesn't carry the sort of baggage the others do (as yet MS hasn't released .hdp under the Open Specification Promise [sic]).

bob_doe_nz
13-03-2007, 07:25 AM
I always though that PNG was supposed to be the next Jpeg

--Wolf--
13-03-2007, 07:58 AM
As long as my picture file names aren't 123_007.hdphoto :lol:

Chilling_Silence
13-03-2007, 08:11 AM
Yes, the next Jpeg perhaps, but not for High Def photos. Its good, but its not perfect. Personally, I'll stick to JPGs / PNG's myself for now :)

johnd
13-03-2007, 08:57 AM
I always though that PNG was supposed to be the next Jpeg

No - PNG is an open improvement on GIF which technically is copywrited to Compuserve - as I understand it they gave up since is became so widely used.

Chilling_Silence
13-03-2007, 12:24 PM
HDPhoto is more a niche market than a JPG killer if you ask me... JPG would be a hard horse to knock over!

dolby digital
13-03-2007, 12:35 PM
M$ will just not stop that innovation. Will they give details of the format freely... mind you, they would do that so that people can use the format and then tighten it up once the format has started to get traction.

R2x1
13-03-2007, 02:42 PM
From Webster's Dictionary

VISTA:
Etymology: Italian, sight, from visto, past participle of vedere to see, from Latin vidEre -- more at WIT
1 : a distant view through or along an avenue or opening : PROSPECT
2 : an extensive mental view (as over a stretch of time or a series of events)
This indicates Vista is a view (or picture) albeit ,according to 2: an extensively mental view.
HD Photo is intend to compress images (or views) so they are smaller and more easily used. Perhaps someone should combine the two to shrivel the bloat out of the os and save it as vista.hdp which could be small enough to be distributed on a floppy disk.
Of course, if the thing is an illusion and not a real view, that would not work. GIGO

porkster
14-03-2007, 08:46 PM
The question is - Will camera manufacturers take it up and run with it? Most of my pictures are in JPG because thats the way the come off the camera. I would say thats the way for most people (I'm talking the less PC enlightened people of the world).
Will there be an X-Lens? God forbid.