Filmscanners mailing list archive (email@example.com)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: (anti)compression?
Lynn Allen penned:
> Although I haven't used it (some members have/do), PNG probably offers the
> best compression in a "lossless" format--according to the chart that Bert
> posted. Photoshop *does* offer that. Whether the format will be around in 20
> years is another matter. :-)
The classic question - will it be around. PNG is an open standard
and offers a significant improvement for lossless compression
over LZW with TIF files. Ive posted this example below, the
reason is simple - the mathematics is more recent, so the compressor
does better - every time.
Will Photoshop be around? Or CD drives, or TIF? In my cupboard
I have some 8 inch floppy disks ... but I moved stuff off of these
when I saw that their end was nigh - TIF will go this way - as will
PNG as will all :)
As for support - it wont go away due to its growing use over GIF
for non photographic images for web work (better features/ compression
than GIF, and no software patent). Most web users dont even notice
that an image is PNG - just a bit faster ...
RAW TIF: 24532 Kb = 2500x3300@24bit
LZW TIF: 20336 Kb = 17% smaller
PNG: 16348 Kb = 33% smaller
For a folder full of TIF scanned images (LZW) = 469 Megs.
The same folder full compressed as PNG = 320 Megs.
Two folders of images per CD ...
Im no evangelist - just a conservationist :)