Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-23-2018, 09:27 AM   #31
Pentaxian
CarlJF's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 1,076
QuoteOriginally posted by macman24054 Quote
Like others have pointed out 8 bit JPEG 2000 has never caught on. Not really sure why.
1) Despite its name, JPEG200 isn't related or an extension of the JPEG format. Thus, it's not backward compatible with JPEG and both require their own code. This means more complex and larger software if support for both format is wanted. Which is a big issue with developers and cameras, since available memory space is quite limited. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for camera manufacturers to integrate both format in their products. And since they had to support jpeg for compatibility reason... Said otherwise, it's the old egg and chicken dilemna: developers never supported JPEG2000 because nobody used it, and nobody used it because developers didn't support it...

2) JPEG2000 is much more computer intensive than JPEG. Not really an issue today, but it was 20 years ago... And could still be today in cameras which still have relatively limited computing power. In a low power,low memory device, JPEG is preferable unless you absolutely have to support JPEG2000. And since nobody had to support JPEG200 but all had to support JPEG...

3) The differences in IQ between format was only visible at high compression ratio. At low compression, differences are few, or not visible enough to justify using JPG2000 over JPG.

Combine all of these, and it's easy to understand why JPEG2000 never replace JPEG for day to day photography sharing. Its advantages don't balance it's disadvantages.

Note that reasons 1 and 3 are still present with the newer formats...


Last edited by CarlJF; 01-23-2018 at 09:34 AM.
01-23-2018, 09:51 AM   #32
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RGlasel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Saskatoon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,263
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
because standalone camera's are hobbled by the inferior JPEG file format
Does anyone set their SOOC JPEG's to lowest quality/smallest file size? I guess the question is if standalone camera operators (who are moving away from quick setup, quick download point and shoot cameras to higher pixel count, "serious" cameras) want to dump the contents of their memory cards straight to social media or if they want to analyze their work in private before sharing their handiwork. It seems to me that the processing power required to permit accurate high speed continuous shooting of 24 MP and larger sensors is more demanding than adding another PP filter to the uploading process, but I could be mistaken. As for the iOS vs. Android thing, I've used both an iPhone and an Android phone of very similar replacement costs extensively over the last six months, and if you ignore the different UI paradigms (which is more along the lines of mildly irritating than limiting), I don't see where the iPhone is noticeably different, for good or bad.

My guess is that once the bugs are out of the AV1 format, support will be incorporated in the next security update for browsers, followed by smartphones in a few months, just to make sure it doesn't break badly in the real world, resulting in millions of unhappy smartphone users. It's the world of desktop image processing software that will lag far behind. Microsoft and Apple don't give a damn about users of standalone cameras and Adobe will take many moons to properly implement AV1 encoding in their rental software. As for desktop software with perpetual licenses, there is no business model to support software engineering and the OSS work by the Alliance is going to be aimed at implementing encoding in GPU hardware and decoding in browsers. Unless the encoding libraries can be easily ported to desktop OS', we "serious" camera users might be stuck with posting JPEGs longer than not-so-serious photographers. Fortunately for us, those NSS photographers couldn't tell the difference between our crappy JPEGs and their brilliant HD AV1 images, anyway. It just means we have to be more tolerant when the NSS crowd boasts about how their advanced hardware is superiour to ours.
01-23-2018, 10:22 AM   #33
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MadMathMind's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,717
QuoteOriginally posted by CarlJF Quote
3) The differences in IQ between format was only visible at high compression ratio. At low compression, differences are few, or not visible enough to justify using JPG2000 over JPG.
Where we'd see the biggest benefits is on Facebook, which compresses the HECK out of images to save space. Have you tried uploading your nice photos? FB will make you want to cry. Those high compression ratios get used a lot now, far more than anyone expected.

I think we kinda figured with broadband being widely available and storage being cheap, we'd see no issue using large high quality images on the web, but the truth is that the opposite has happened. For one, we underestimated how four websites would end up with 80% of the content in their hands; I think it was assumed it would be far more decentralized with no one website having 2 billion people log in every day to upload photos. With it going mobile, we've seen an emphasis to reduce quality solely because of size (and small screens). A lot of the good effort that has taken place in video over the past years has been to reduce bandwidth consumption to make videos more watchable over 4G LTE.
01-23-2018, 10:30 AM   #34
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,408
It's interesting to think about the different types of companies in the digital image industry and their incentives for adopting a replacement for JPEG:

Low-end consumer image capture devices: JPEG is cheap, easy, and good enough for SOOC.

High-end consumer image capture devices: Competition for better SOOC quality will drive adoption of a JPEG replacement.

Professional image capture devices: RAW is king (it's only the "enthusiast" versions that compete with consumer devices than need better SOOC formats).

Image manipulation software: Only adopt if necessary. (e.g., it looks like Abode is slowly adopting HEIC in some products to be compatible with the iPhone)

Image hosting services: Strong incentives to adopt (Facebook would love to see it's image hosting and image bandwidth costs cut in half)

Image viewing devices: Only adopt if necessary. (But it looks like Google & Mozilla are pushing for AV1 in Chrome & Firefox)


Overall, Apple seems to be pushing HEIC from the device side and Google/Mozilla are pushing AV1 from the browser side. Apple is interesting because they have full control the image capture device (iPhone), hosting (iTunes), and view devices (iPhones, iPads, and Macs) but they are a pretty small fraction of the market. Google only has influence (not control) of the capture-hosting-viewing stack. Google can't force Android device makers to adopt AV1 assuming AV1 is even feasible on Android hardware. (Note: Apple has full control of the CPU/GPU designs of their devices, Google does not.)

01-23-2018, 10:56 AM   #35
Pentaxian
CarlJF's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 1,076
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Apple is interesting because they have full control the image capture device (iPhone), hosting (iTunes), and view devices (iPhones, iPads, and Macs) but they are a pretty small fraction of the market.
And this is also what will prevent HEIC to become largely adopted. It's a closed format protected by patents, not easy and costly to implement for anyone but Apple. Nobody is interested in paying license fees to Apple to replace JPG. The open and free nature of AV1 gives it a huge advantage in this respect. It's quite easy for any interested developer to jump in, without having to pay license fees or find ways around patents. I would bet on AV1 more than HEIC, but JPEG will still be around for many many years...

Last edited by CarlJF; 01-23-2018 at 11:03 AM.
01-23-2018, 10:59 AM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,211
QuoteOriginally posted by MadMathMind Quote
Where we'd see the biggest benefits is on Facebook, which compresses the HECK out of images to save space. Have you tried uploading your nice photos? FB will make you want to cry. Those high compression ratios get used a lot now, far more than anyone expected.
I like your optimism that we'd see a quality improvement on FB. The pessimist would expect Facebook would continue to deliver the same garbage compression and reap the benefits of cutting their data usage in half with an improved algorithm.
01-23-2018, 11:57 AM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,364
QuoteOriginally posted by automorphism Quote
Are you saying that Linux is the underlying kernel of OS X? If so, that's absolutely not true. OS X's kernel is Darwin and was based on Mach and BSD. Although both share similar features on the virtue of being based on unix-like systems (and OS X is unix certified), they don't share code.
The OS X kernel is XNU. (XNU is Not Unix) But OS X is Unix...since version 10.5 anyway...Darwin is an OS...

QuoteQuote:
What is XNU?

XNU kernel is part of the Darwin operating system for use in OS X and iOS operating systems. XNU is an acronym for XNU is Not Unix. XNU is a hybrid kernel combining the Mach kernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University with components from FreeBSD and C++ API for writing drivers called IOKit. XNU runs on I386, X86_64 for both single processor and multi-processor configurations.
Enough of a thread hijack

Some things that Apple owns have become part of Linux. Like CUPS (Formerly Common UNIX Printing System)

Last edited by boriscleto; 01-23-2018 at 12:03 PM.
01-23-2018, 12:26 PM   #38
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,133
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Enough of a thread hijack

)
No kidding, the point was, it's open source.I pay little attention to the letters that define OS's these days. The differences between Unix and Linux and whatever are of interest only to those who use those systems. These days, the letters don't matter, but it better work.

01-23-2018, 01:45 PM   #39
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 931
QuoteOriginally posted by CarlJF Quote
And this is also what will prevent HEIC to become largely adopted. It's a closed format protected by patents, not easy and costly to implement for anyone but Apple. Nobody is interested in paying license fees to Apple to replace JPG. The open and free nature of AV1 gives it a huge advantage in this respect. It's quite easy for any interested developer to jump in, without having to pay license fees or find ways around patents. I would bet on AV1 more than HEIC, but JPEG will still be around for many many years...
I mentioned this earlier, but Apple is now onboard with AV1 having bought into Google's vision after-all. Why the change of plans? Simply put Apple is investing heavily into media streaming and the uncertain royalty demands of the fractured HVEC/HEIC standard isn't something they're comfortable with. No less than 4 different groups (three in addition to MPEG) claim to have IP that reads on it, and all want their own contracts in order to use it. Had Apple snatched up YouTube instead of Google they'd have come to this conclusion long before now.

Note that HEIC is not an Apple creation anyway. It's from the MPEG group.

Last edited by gatorguy; 01-23-2018 at 01:58 PM.
01-23-2018, 10:45 PM   #40
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Apple is interesting in that one could argue they are an extremely predatory company (except for the part where no one has to buy their product, unlike food, clothing, water, medicine etc, etc.) but they also belong to and contribute 6 or so engineers to Linux as the underpinnings of their OS. SO they are one of the best examples of predatory capitalism (price fixing etc.) and co-operative non-capitalistic endeavour. A real Jeckle and Hyde company.

The only thing I'd be interested in seeing would be a clear difference in IQ, that I can see without having two images side by side. IF jpeg is good enough, and what's being suggested is only marginally better, then the resources to make a change would probably be pretty much wasted. If it gets to the point where you walk in and see two side by side identical systems one displaying jpeg and the other displaying whatever, there is a clear and noticeable difference, then I can see making a switch. But my guess would be the display is the limiting factor.

If the display is 8 bit, then it's no disadvantage having an 8 bit compression engine. I have no idea how many bits any tech can display these days. I am unqualified for further comment.

I'm much more concerned about the way it looks than file size.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but OS-X is based on Free BSD with a bit of Net BSD thrown in.
01-23-2018, 10:55 PM   #41
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 13,029
QuoteOriginally posted by SciFiGuy Quote
Not to put too fine a point on it, but OS-X is based on Free BSD with a bit of Net BSD thrown in.
Yep, Mac's OS X is *not* based on Linux.

If anything, Google's Android is.

Last edited by clackers; 01-24-2018 at 12:30 AM.
01-24-2018, 04:28 AM   #42
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
macman24054's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Axton, VA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by CarlJF Quote
Not really sure why.
Actually this was a stupid statement on my part. At this point, the two file needs are for print and electronic and the file types we use cover this two needs quite nicely. And Mac OS X is Unix based.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
algorithm, apple, format, google, internet, jpeg, mozilla, photo, photography, quality, replacement for jpeg, speeds, windows explorer
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Jpeg with K1 KX5 Pentax K-1 46 02-18-2017 04:34 PM
Different exposure between RAW and JPEG in RAW + JPEG - possible? BigMackCam Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 10-08-2016 01:50 AM
Raw + jpeg versus embedded jpeg cpk Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 12-23-2014 08:44 AM
JPEG, RAW, JPEG + RAW...huh? Raptorman Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 14 12-22-2009 11:49 AM
RAW + JPEG with JPEG on One Star quality laissezfaire Pentax DSLR Discussion 58 12-10-2008 02:42 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:51 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top