Sometime around 12/1/08 (at 17:01 +0100) Hans Nyberg said:
I have complained about this for the last 4-5 years. First Panocube
and then Pano2QTVR.
Now it is even a larger problem as we now also have Pano2VR for Mac.
As far as I know RealViz uses the same standard as we always had on
Mac also for Windows.
And as this standard is very close to Photoshop save for web it
should be the one which should be used.
But there are many other ways of calculating the level of
compression! Photoshop's is not the only one worth using; in fact, it
is slanted towards quality rather than compression; a particular
percentage value in it has a different quality/compression balance
than in some other tools. There's no reason why everything should use
that.
There's never been a single standard, except perhaps back when the
JPEG format was a new, experimental format that couldn't be read by
anything directly other than the compression tools. And even then, I
seem to remember different tools would produce different results with
apparently-similar options. But certainly since JPEG files have been
more widely used, there's not been a single true industry-wide
standard for compression settings, not that I'm aware of.
Should there be a single standard? It makes a lot of sense. But who
gets to decide what that is? And should it be slanted more towards
compression or quality? I do suspect Adobe's approach isn't entirely
linear, and others may not be either.
k
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
QuickTime-VR mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/quicktime-vr/email@hidden
