Beware of some large files

[NDGAARONDI]

I have downloaded a 1.01 GB .zip file, which, contained thousands of BMPs. When I extracted these images using UltimateZip, I opened the images using Paint Shop Pro 7 and saved them as JPEGs. I then continued to the same for each folder within the archive and found I have basically 'compressed' up to 30-50 times. After this was done to every image I then recompiled the folders and archived it to .zip format, the result was that it finished to about 100MB.

Why do people insist that BMPs are that much better than JPEGs, when there visible quality differences are almost hardly visible? Large files on the eMule network have a larger chance of becoming corrupted.

I reviewed the differences of the file I downloaded and could not genuinely tell the differences between the JPEG and the BMP.

Anyone encountered the same situation?

[.:sp00ky:.]

The big difference i notice (apart from the size) between JPEG and BMP is that jpeg doesnt handle some colours very well at all red been the one you will notice the most(it turns it into somet weird pixlated brown sometimes) i do think bmp is still much better i wouldnt download a comic in jpeg format.

[MushroomheadXIII]

Yeh, jpeg is simpler and bmp is just the ultimate uncompressed format. You should use irfanview - it's an imageviewer and a batch converter = much easier than separate converting. Bmp is usually the formate used for separate rasterized layers in adobe ps which makes the psds so goddamn big. I hate bitmaps though.

[NDGAARONDI]

The big difference i notice (apart from the size) between JPEG and BMP is that jpeg doesnt handle some colours very well at all red been the one you will notice the most

I've noticed only in one picture that I downloaded within this .zip file a very slight difference. I viewed all pictures using IrfanView, IE and PSP. But after a few tries I never bothered because I was happy with the image quality after conversion.


i do think bmp is still much better

But I didn't think it was considering how much longer I had to wait for the damn thing to download! lol


i wouldnt download a comic in jpeg format.

Nor would I. So much better to use JPEGs for a wider usage when BMPs are restricted, and I don't fancy burning to DVDs until I have a new DVD burner :p

[mcovey]

... PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG PNG

... sorry but PNG is really better. It's larger filesize, but better quality and MUCH smaller than BMP.

[cpugeniusmv]

i typically use jpeg for photos...and png for everything else. (it's especially good for screenshots)

[NDGAARONDI]

i typically use jpeg for photos...and png for everything else. (it's especially good for screenshots)

Interesting point about PNGs. When I did my conversions the only real difference was when I tried converting BMPs to GIFs.

[Malakai1911]

PNG-24 is superior to JPG imho, and PNG-8 gives GIF a run for its money. PNGCRUSH gets the best size out of the photo, too.

[ferrarimodena360]

bmp is better, but jpeg wins due to size

[MushroomheadXIII]

Bmp by far is the best quality, but i still don't like it. PNG is best, then JPEG. <--In my opinion of course because you can have good quality transparency.

[cjules13]

bmp's are lossless, jpg's are lossy.

It's like a 320k mp3... sounds great, but still not quite as good as the original.

[Metalseeker 79]

The difference in this notorious screenshot is quite noticeable, especially the lettering.

[SanDiegoKid]

You have no chance to survive make your time.

[Rajarius]

Because BMPs are lossless. PNG is the next best thing tho, since it preserves transparency.

[cheapprick]

I'll bite.

A gigabyte of what kind of pictures?

[NDGAARONDI]

A gigabyte of what kind of pictures?

Bitmaps. :green6

[cpugeniusmv]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/250000/images/_250800_porn_on_net300.jpg

[muffenme]

:fire

I try to use BMP the less because of how large they can get, it like listening to a WAV file or watching a uncompressed AVI video file. It might look great but too big.

You could say PNG it like the next best thing because it has the best quility for it side and like bmp can be edited.

GIF aren't bad but only support upto 8 bit color and this is the main problem for image for high amount of color where color would be lost. This is good for grey scale image like magna.

JPG have some advantage over GIF but it also has some disavantage to. You can get some small files but you can loss some pixal and this make this one of the worse when it comes to changing the image. But if the image is left unedited and you don't want to look to closely at it then it fine to use.

:hole

[NDGAARONDI]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/250000/images/_250800_porn_on_net300.jpg

Nope. They were just pictures of a model with photo shoots, bit like what you see in clothes' magazines etc.

[mfgbypooter]

I like clothes models.

[Christoph]

WHATT ABOUT THE NEW JPG2000? they said that its the most little and the most powerfull format!but I was never abel to find it!aren't there any new formats out?

[inoesomestuff]

=\ i dont really have that much experience w/the differernt formats. i know when heavily compressed jpeg looks bad and shifts the colors but w/less compression isnt this gone? ie doesnt have built in PNG support =( so many dont know about PNG

[shawners]

People should compress into .rar files since they can stay more intact and not get corrupted.. Also BT is a great way to get files and not be corrupted.. People make a torrent, hash each file individually and then uploadsd the details to the tracker.. Which you can hash files at 128 bits or 512bits which would make the seeding go slower. And less pieces.

[Lehk]

:fire

You could say PNG it like the next best thing because it has the best quility for it side and like bmp can be edited.


:hole

PNG >BMP Ping is lossless compression, if you convert a bitmap to a ping, then convert the ping back to bitmap, both bitmaps will be the same. Ping works by only removing redundant informaiton. I would like to see a filter that would slightly degrade an image's quality in order to optimize ping compression at the expense of a bit of image quality.

[infringer]

A lot of screenshot utilities simply screenshot images to bmp so rather then screenshotting and converinging all of these images people just simply zip them up to make life easier on them ...

HDD space is cheap and bandwidth is unlimited or supposed to be anyways so somepeople prefer to save time and leave things a little less compressed others are very particular about quality not that PNG or JPEG aint good enough for me as I dont mind an image in any format and never noticed a big enough differnce to cry over or argue about...

Compression is the shit I should learn about compression and techniques and algorythims myself they seem to be a big interest to me.

There was one company who achived the greatest compression ever its all interesting the more like the original the better but there is that happy medium where you lose very little quality with the ability to chop the file size down that I like the most.

-infringer-

[chilledoutuk]

Because BMPs are lossless. PNG is the next best thing tho, since it preserves transparency.

The PNG 24 compression format is lossless so therefore it is better than bmp with better compression and the same quality.

[method]

For anyone that doesn't know... JPG's turn dark, low-contrast areas of the image into blocks because those parts are less noticeable to the human eye. MPGs work in much the same way.

And there is a lossless image compression format coming out, I can't remember the details but I'm sure someone will post the info in this thread if they haven't already.

[infringer]

PNG is a great image I will have to agree.

Compression to quality it surpasses... But JPEG isnt as bad as its sounding in this thread not to my eye at least. Its a little darker and accents some colors a bit better then others. But really it is not that big of a deal to me.

-infringer-

[inoesomestuff]

well with jpeg ALOT depends on compression amount, if you adjust it up too high the colors look weird