2EZ Posted July 23, 2005 Report Share Posted July 23, 2005 I have used pik2x for a while, its been an investment. Lately, I have started using the latest state-of-the-art compression format .jp2 for my pictures, as it has Xlent size:to:quality ratio. Is it a licensing/cost issue for using this jpeg2000/.jp2 coding, or isnt there a universal mainstream code for this jpeg2000/.jp2 yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflow Posted July 23, 2005 Report Share Posted July 23, 2005 Hi 2EZ,Welcome to the Forum ~There really is no main-stream support as yet for the 'New Jpeg 2000 Format' but the following may help you:-1) Your 'Image Viewer' must support the JPeg 2000 Format.2) Your PC.Monitor/Video Card must have the correct driver ~ test to see if it works !3) Get on to www.snapfiles.com and type in 'JPeg Compressor' ~ there is a utility that will convert standard JPegs to JPeg 2000 with a compression advantage of 3:1 without loss of quality. May be useful to Forum Members.4) Alternatively contact the Program Home Page...www.anything3d.com...A reversal Program is also available from that author...Jpeg 2000 to Standard JPeg.Hope this Helps,Brian.Conflow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2EZ Posted July 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 Thanks for the advice...Welcome to the Forum ~There really is no main-stream support as yet for the 'New Jpeg 2000 Format' but the following may help you:-1) Your 'Image Viewer' must support the JPeg 2000 Format.2) ........Pic2exe is what i currently use as my clients "Image Viewer" .Basically, i have encountered a few slideshow programs that can use and display an array of formats.(BMP, GIF, JP2, JPC, JPG, PNG, PSD.) Basically i was wondering about the implementation of the .jp2 format into pictures to exe asone of its picture formats. All my shows total download sizes (currently jpeg) are @1000mb. Having the same shows on the server, but using the .jp2 format, weighs in at around 340mb!!! Pic2exe has more going for it than most hope to be, but a compromise over Quality with Ability is iminent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflow Posted July 24, 2005 Report Share Posted July 24, 2005 For:-2EZPersonally I would try it out.....Why not make a 5 Slide Show with JPeg 2000 or download the 'Converter to JPeg2000' (as I indicated) and use it to make 5 Slides of JPeg 2000 ?As I said, it depends whether the Image Viewer can support the Format and more importantly will your Hardware Monitor/Video Card support it ?Only one thing to do...try it out ~ at least if it doesn't work then I am quite sure that Igor our Administrator/Show Designer will make it work in the interests of the PTE Software.Brian.Conflow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflow Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 My Last Post to 2EZI tried out JPeg 2000 last night and was very surprised to learn that excepting a few specialised 'JPeg 2000 Viewers' (and some XP.PC's) nothing else works with this new fomat.So I done some research and got to the bottom as to why it has not yet been adopted:-* Jpeg 2000 is in its final Submissions for ISO World Standards Acceptance.* Currently its being used in Radiography, and Medical Scanners on Beta-Testing procedures.* Standard Jpeg ISO Viewers require special Codec's to run the new 2000 Format.* Not all Monitor/Video Cards have the necessary Drivers to impliment the Format.* The 'Digital Photographic Industry' are waiting for the final Standards Approvals.There you have it...Brian.Conflow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igor Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Currently we have no plans about adding of JPEG 2000 support to PicturesToExe. There is main reason not to do it:Much slower loading of JPEG2000 images. Aproximatelly in 4 times! Because better compression algorithms in JPEG2000 take more CPU time.It's not suitable for slide-show at all.p.s. I've created test JPEG2000 file (42 KB) using IrfanView and JPEG2000 plug-in and usual JPEG (also about 42 KB). Both from BMP file 512x512 768 KB.I found that JPEG2000 image has blurred areas in some places, but JPEG looks as BMP original in same places.The only thing that I found that JPEG2000 looks better than JPEG on very low file size, then JPEG has terrible artefacts, but JPEG2000 looks much better. But for usual purposes I see no reason to use JPEG2000. It's my personal opinion, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflow Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 Jpeg 2000Igor,Yes, I completely agree with you, my 'research' came up with the same Image results as you have found. It might be O.K for 'Radiography' usage, but it's simply not ready yet for the Photo Industry andat this point in time it would be totally incompatible with the current 'JPeg World Standard' ~Regards,Brian.Conflow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.