Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: JPG Compression - The Bandwidth Saver Article




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    4,308

    Default

    The only "error" is the fact that I used the simplfied three letter DOS extension format, JPG, instead of JPEG because it is more common. This does not make everything else in the article incorrect, as you suggest.
    Cameron "Mr.Tweak" Wilmot
    Managing Director
    Tweak Town Pty Ltd

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Tweak
    The only "error" is the fact that I used the simplfied three letter DOS extension format, JPG, instead of JPEG because it is more common. This does not make everything else in the article incorrect, as you suggest.
    Oh please, don't try to pass it off as a "oh, whoops, DOS calls it that". Do you also refer to text files as txt files because Windows says thats the file extension to? No, because that would be dumb, just like calling them JPG when they are not is also.

    Simplified my ass.

    I also no-where suggested the rest was wrong. Though your ratios are wrong.

    The "wrongness" extends from the fact your write a begineer JPEG article & don't even call it that. Heck you don't explain what JPEG is. Oh wait, you don't even call it what it actually is so why would you.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    4,308

    Default

    Judging by your comments, you seem to be one of those people who won't even attempt to see things from a different prospective. So, I'm not going to continue any further after this post.

    As for ratios being incorrect, I'm only reporting it as I see it, and in this case it is what PSP reported. And I'll say it again, the article was intended to be basic and not be an extensive report on JPG or JPEG.

    Some people you'll just never be able to keep happy. :(
    Cameron "Mr.Tweak" Wilmot
    Managing Director
    Tweak Town Pty Ltd

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Tweak
    As for ratios being incorrect, I'm only reporting it as I see it, and in this case it is what PSP reported. And I'll say it again, the article was intended to be basic and not be an extensive report on JPG or JPEG.

    Some people you'll just never be able to keep happy. :(
    Ok lets see shall we. Page 2. Image details;
    "Original Compressed Image (2:1) 61.3kb"
    "Highly Compressed Image (25:1) 16.7kb"

    Here you claim you compressed the "Highly Compressed Image" over the original compressed image above at a 25:1 ratio. 25:1 = 4% of the original size.
    4% of 61.3k = 2.452k

    Wait a minute!! But the "Highly Compressed Image" is 16.7k. UH-OH! Looks like someone can't use a calculator here.

    Your "Highly Compressed Image" is in fact closer to 4:1 than 25:1 (3.67:1 in fact if you round the decimals up a little).

    This throws your "article" into a whole new light doesn't it. It says 2 things;
    A. I don't what JPEG is.
    B. I can't do basic division.

    Paint Shop Pro is not reporting "Compression ratio", it is reporting Compression %. You selected 25 PERCENT, not 25:1. My values prove here prove me right.

    Please before you consider posting stuff can you at least check it's right?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    just a quick note;
    .jpg and .jpeg are the same, not 2 different types of files - just different file extensions.
    If any confusion was caused by this, blame Microsoft. It seems they took the "Experts" out of the file extension:?:
    The reason a diamond shines so brightly is because it has many facets which reflect light.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    4,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered

    Ok lets see shall we. Page 2. Image details;
    "Original Compressed Image (2:1) 61.3kb"
    "Highly Compressed Image (25:1) 16.7kb"

    Here you claim you compressed the "Highly Compressed Image" over the original compressed image above at a 25:1 ratio. 25:1 = 4% of the original size.
    4% of 61.3k = 2.452k

    Wait a minute!! But the "Highly Compressed Image" is 16.7k. UH-OH! Looks like someone can't use a calculator here.

    Your "Highly Compressed Image" is in fact closer to 4:1 than 25:1 (3.67:1 in fact if you round the decimals up a little).

    This throws your "article" into a whole new light doesn't it. It says 2 things;
    A. I don't what JPEG is.
    B. I can't do basic division.

    Paint Shop Pro is not reporting "Compression ratio", it is reporting Compression %. You selected 25 PERCENT, not 25:1. My values prove here prove me right.

    Please before you consider posting stuff can you at least check it's right?

    Point taken. I thought PSP used ratios not percentages - Forgive me I made a mistake, that makes me human. :rolleyes2
    Cameron "Mr.Tweak" Wilmot
    Managing Director
    Tweak Town Pty Ltd

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •