JPEG XR Format?

[BIJ001]

"Microsoft's royalty-free commitment will help the JPEG committee foster
widespread adoption of the specification and help ensure that it can
be implemented by the widest possible audience," the organization
said, encouraging others to take that approach when trying to set
standards."

Other than the paranoia about anything connected to Windows, it's
sounds promising.

If M$ offers it royalty-free to use only on legal Windows copies?

 

[john120588]

JPEG XR digital image format to eventually replace JPG? Article can
be viewed at:

http://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9810024-39.html

--
Mardis

I believe when people started to move to this format, that mean the images you capture in the past will start to vanish.

 

[john120588]

I also think the HD photo software, when developed through the
standards committee and adopted in cameras and computers, will add a
lot of up-to-now unavailable quality to the work of photographers
(even duffers like me).
Say Hey

if you believe in this, this make digital never last, company keep changing format to sqzeen $$$, but people think they are helping the world.

 

[Anastigmat]

More importantly is how this format will fare in the photography industry. People shoot RAW to get the maximum picture quality or JPEG for maximum processing speed and economy in storage. Is there a JPEG XR in the future of cameras. Probably, since many cameras do not have RAW mode, especially the compact digitals. And a file format that promises better image quality without costing the manufacturers anything more in terms of manufacturing cost will probably be welcomed.

There have been other attempts in the past to replace jpg. If this
provides better results without appreciable penalty (such a
processing load to use), then it could well replace jpg over time.
The processing load is an issue because cameras tend to be often
limited by their "computer" power in how fast they can process
images. A secondary issue is power drain because increasing computer
speed usually involves more power and perhaps more cooling.
--
Leon
http://homepage.mac.com/leonwittwer/landscapes.htm

 

[D Q E]

JPEG XR digital image format to eventually replace JPG?

It's just Microsoft 'embracing and extending' JPEG. It has no value to anyone but Microsoft.

--
mumbo jumbo

 

[Nathan Yan]

JPEG XR digital image format to eventually replace JPG?

It's just Microsoft 'embracing and extending' JPEG. It has no value
to anyone but Microsoft.

HD Photo was developed independent of JPEG. This is JPEG (the group) embracing HD Photo, but taking it under their own name ("JPEG XR")

 

[Nathan Yan]

I also think the HD photo software, when developed through the
standards committee and adopted in cameras and computers, will add a
lot of up-to-now unavailable quality to the work of photographers
(even duffers like me).
Say Hey

if you believe in this, this make digital never last, company keep
changing format to sqzeen $$$, but people think they are helping the
world.

How much money have you ever paid anyone to use the JPEG format?

 

[Athegn]

Quote from the link:-

"The country vote is done, and it passed,"

I tried to find the make up of the countries that voted for this but failed.

I found this link that lists the committee members:-

http://www.jpeg.org/join.html

but that did not say how they voted on JPEG XR

Can anyone advise?

 

[Tim Dolan]

If I read everything correctly, JPeg XR is essentially a compressed TIF with 32-bit compatability. In lossess mode it is almost exactly like a TIF image and we are likely to see under most conditions at best a 4.3 to 1 compression (although they indicated a 2.5 to 1 is more likely ). But if we are willing to accept a lossy compression then we get a compression that appears to be twice as efficient as jpeg, plus we now have 16 and 32 bit abillity with it.

If it is actually free to impliment, then where do we sign up; however as I read it Microsoft may be retaining some future rights to the algorithms, which means might as well forget about it now, because nobody is likely to use it except microsoft.

--
Save the Model, Save the Camera, The photographer can be repaired.

 

[doctor digi]

More importantly is how this format will fare in the photography
industry. People shoot RAW to get the maximum picture quality or
JPEG for maximum processing speed and economy in storage. Is there a
JPEG XR in the future of cameras. Probably, since many cameras do
not have RAW mode, especially the compact digitals. And a file
format that promises better image quality without costing the
manufacturers anything more in terms of manufacturing cost will
probably be welcomed.

Cameras that have no RAW are being used by people that only want to take snaps. They aren't going to notice any difference between 8bit and > 8 bit pictures - especially if they're using the latest noisy 25MP P&S.

Better Jpeg is aimed at the higher part of the market, but most people there are using RAW for critical stuff anyway. I really can't see a market for this based purely on it being placed in cameras. There has to be another driving factor.

I think the driving factor is MS itself. Cameras will follow, not lead on this issue.

 

[Nathan Yan]

More importantly is how this format will fare in the photography
industry. People shoot RAW to get the maximum picture quality or
JPEG for maximum processing speed and economy in storage. Is there a
JPEG XR in the future of cameras. Probably, since many cameras do
not have RAW mode, especially the compact digitals. And a file
format that promises better image quality without costing the
manufacturers anything more in terms of manufacturing cost will
probably be welcomed.

Cameras that have no RAW are being used by people that only want to
take snaps. They aren't going to notice any difference between 8bit
and > 8 bit pictures - especially if they're using the latest noisy
25MP P&S.

Better Jpeg is aimed at the higher part of the market, but most
people there are using RAW for critical stuff anyway. I really can't
see a market for this based purely on it being placed in cameras.
There has to be another driving factor.

But your premise is based on JPEG XR only appealling to high-end shooters. JPEG XR has just as much appeal to regular consumer cameras, however. It is not all about the 16-bit or lossless compression, but also the smaller file size. Consumers and camera makers would welcome being able to store 1000 images on a camera instead of 500.

I also have a 5D and shoot JPEG all the time, so I disagree with your assumption that most people shooting at the high-end only use RAW.

 

[doctor digi]

I also have a 5D and shoot JPEG all the time, so I disagree with your
assumption that most people shooting at the high-end only use RAW.

That's not what I said.

 

[Nathan Yan]

I also have a 5D and shoot JPEG all the time, so I disagree with your
assumption that most people shooting at the high-end only use RAW.

That's not what I said.

This is what you said:

"Better Jpeg is aimed at the higher part of the market, but most people there are using RAW for critical stuff anyway."

 

[DRG]

this is the micro$oft money grab and just wait and see what the
royalties will be, especially if it gets into widespread use.

Run, don't walk, away from this dog.

Microsoft may be a large corporation, but the HDPhoto team is made up of some good, earnest engineers led by Bill Crow who's been extremely open about all details of this format. I heard him speak in depth about in on a podcast and was impressed with how comprehensive and well thought-out the format is. I also understand that the format is royalty-free. Microsoft wants the format in cameras because they have applications in mind that benefit from / require the format and wish to also distinguish their products by offering display/editing/manipulation support for the format built into windows. This compliments and is not in conflict with HDPhoto (now JPEG XR) being an excellent all-around format. I particularly like the fact that lossless form of the format is just one extreme of a continuum of compression levels rather than being a distinct format, making it likely to be implemented. Further, the format is very computation-friendly and is thus not a burden to implement in hardware. Finally, it's nice that you can represent tones below black and above white. That is, the file records the preferred default black and white point and maps things this way when you view the file. However, you can move those points outward after the fact to bring those tones below the black point and above the white point into play. Basically, this format has much of the advantage of raw except that the demosaicing step is done already and thus any visual impact of the demosaicing algorithm is locked in. Yet, it has the advantage of being standardized and displayable on any device without the need for constant codec updates.

David