Talk:JPEG XR

message: The licensing section of the article needs to state that it is a license quite similar to a BSD one in that a BSD licensed file does not become GPL licensed just because it is compiled and linked into an application that has a GPL license.  MS is stating that the code does not go into a GPL type license.   The article also incorrectly states that it cannot be distributed with a GPL based operating system.  That is not true because it can be distributed as its own self-contained binary along with the operating system.
The article's licensing section doesn't mention that most of the other consumer level image, video, audio formats are under a much more closed licensing than HD Photo.  
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.253.16.1 (talk) 16:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Update to Licensing Needed

message: I am working on this article. Please hang on for a day or two. --soUmyaSch 19:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --soUmyaSch 12:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Working

message: How open will this format be? Will third parties be able to write plugins using this format? Will it be legally encumbered to sabotage any hope of interoperability? grendel|khan 17:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would you suspect Microsoft of using a format standard to control and thwart interoperability?  Have they ever done that before? Dicklyon 18:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Microsoft has 15 issued U.S. patents that mention "lapped biorthogonal transform", mostly with inventor Henrique S. Malvar.  Those might be a good source of public-domain description and drawings of their methods. Dicklyon 18:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensing? 

message: Can there be a section which talks about the support of this file format, i.e. which programs can read it? Althepal 05:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: I've just learned that Kodak published "a default set of Kodak reference images that are commonly used in the image compression industry to demonstrate the effectiveness of various methods" (ref.: StuffIt® Image Compression White Paper, Date: 1/5/2006 (Revision 2.1) page 5 of 15).  The reference set consists of a series of uncompressed *.png photos.  Thumbnails of the Kodak reference images can be seen on page 6 of 15; obtain your own free copy of the white paper by filling out a very brief form at http://www.stuffit.com/imagecompression/.
I'm still trying to find out how to obtain a set of Kodak's images, and whether or not they are free.  In the meantime if someone else already knows, please enlighten all of us.
Meanwhile I did some stopwatch-timed tests on my Mac and verified what I already strongly suspected.  When I compress a *.tif it slashes the size by 36%.  When saved to my fastest HDD, the compressed versions take about 31% longer to open.  To be a fair test, my graphics editor was launched well prior to the test and left open continuously.  (E.g. 3.5" x 4.5" 24-bit RGB, 7.5 MB uncompressed opens in 3.54 sec, vs. 4.8 MB compressed opens in 4.63 sec).
Badly Bradley 17:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or just get the white paper here. Dicklyon 21:23, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I found the images, too, here. Dicklyon 21:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kodak's standard test images

message: XP user already support to view the HD photo by downloading Windows Live Photo Gallery. Matthew_hk tc 21:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software support 

message: If it has not been already standardized, why is the article title changed? The lines in the article say "under consideration" and  "tentatively titled".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.147.219 (talk) 15:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Until the announcement from Official sources that "HD Photo is now JPEG XR", we should stick with the old name. If no one objects, I will move it back. --soum talk 23:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardization as JPEG XR 

message: Halfway through the "Compression algorithm" section, the article begins referring to something called the "PCT", which I assume is some kind of transform. A google search gives two possibilities: "Pairwise Correlating Transform" and "Photo Core Transform". The former could be a reference to the Karhunen-Loève theorem, and would kind of make sense, but the latter looks to be the more likely expansion. In any case, it's pointless to just start using an acronym mid-article without any explanation.
As it stands, the article's explanation of the algorithm is essentially:
# Divide into blocks
# ??? (PCT)
# Profit!
mistercow (talk) 00:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote the original description based on the freely available format specification from MS (I think it was part of the Device Porting Kit). The spec is rather poorly written and omits a lot of details (saying to consult the reference implementation, which I didn't do). It never says what PCT stands for (not that I noticed, anyway), so I never spelled it out in my summary. Three anonymous editors later made this aggregate change, and Dicklyon then made this edit, removing the first mention of PCT but not the subsequent mentions, which left it in its current confusing state. As far as I can tell Dicklyon's change is incorrect (the PCT is precisely specified in the spec and it is lossless), so I just undid it. I don't know if PCT really stands for Photo Core Transform, nor do I know the theory behind it. -- BenRG (talk) 16:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm pretty sure it's what's called a "lapped transform."  I'll look for sources; there are lots of technical papers on lapped transforms by the relevant Microsoft researchers, but I'm not sure where or if they say that's what's in the HD Photo codec. Sorry I messed up the PCT reference. Dicklyon (talk) 08:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I believe it is meaningless to state that a transform is in itself lossless. Usually in image compression, the quantization step (the step after transformation) introduces the loss of data (this is the case with JPEG). I think it would be better to say something like "The transform enables lossless compression". This is of course very vague, but vague is just what this article is at this point, regarding the mysterious transform. I'm trying to learn some more about HD photo, and I will post something here if I learn something useful. Janpeder (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In JPEG 2000, the transform is designed to be exactly invertible, when computed with integers; in JPEG, that's not the case, even before the quantization step.  That's the sense in which the transform itself can be lossless or not. Dicklyon (talk) 18:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCT? 

message: Greetings, everyone
I'm sure by now you all know that this file format is now officially called JPEG XR is now a free international standard:
* 
* 
It is time to rename the article into JPEG XR. Is there any valid objections?
Please register any valid objections within the next seven days. Afterward, I'll archive this topic and will proceed with the rename.
17:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and moved it (over a redirect) because this seems too obvious to need a discussion period. -- BenRG (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope you did the right thing. Fleet Command (talk) 08:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is now officially JPEG XR – It is time to rename. 

message: The HD Photo bitstream specification claims that "HD Photo offers image quality comparable to JPEG-2000 with computational and memory performance more closely comparable to JPEG", 
Is this taken from MS presentation? seems it is not truth. Is independent reaserch availible ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.26.156.207 (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The JPEG committee studied the technology and was satisfied with its capabilities (or they presumably would not have approved it as a standard).  However, that statement seems to have come from Microsoft (because that is a quote from the HD Photo bitstream specification, not the JPEG XR standard). –LightStarch (talk) 16:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memory performance 

message: I am looking at the sidebar. How is it possible that the latest release was before the initial release? Is this a mistake?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikez302 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to be. I changed the date to that mentioned in the history section.--Oneiros (talk) 21:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The standards organizations have published some new specs and revisions. I just updated various places in the article to reflect that. —LightStarch (talk) 05:34, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release dates 

message: This article is not a standalone list. Therefore, it may have a number of items without a Wikipedia articles, just for the sake of having broad coverage on the matter, especially in the light of the fact that the total number of supporting software isn't so high to threaten a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE.
In time, I think I have found independent sources on some of the items. I am about to add them to the article. Fleet Command (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have independent sources, by all means add them. But the ones that are referenced only by the vendor's own site should be removed. - MrOllie (talk) 17:38, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Which means you didn't read my message at all. Whenever you decided to read it, I'll be here. Fleet Command (talk) 11:44, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I read it, I just disagree. - MrOllie (talk) 15:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh! May I ask exactly with which part do you not agree? Fleet Command (talk) 19:34, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software support: Items to be listed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on JPEG XR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090901185852/http://www.jpeg.org/newsrel26.html to http://jpeg.org/newsrel26.html
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6EFJE8STm?url=http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=5863 to http://microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=285eeffd-d86c-48c3-ab93-3abd5ee7f1ce&displaylang=en
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:06, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on JPEG XR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090317092606/http://jpeg.org/newsrel19.html to http://www.jpeg.org/newsrel19.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100925193937/http://jpeg.org/newsrel28.html to http://www.jpeg.org/newsrel28.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:21, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I almost didn't notice it honestly, but when not logged in, this article is served with most of the navigation links in chinese. Inspecting the source shows the root html tag has lang="zh-Hans-CN", and several script and stylesheet links contain href="/w/load.php?lang=zh-cn..." at the beginning of their url. Some content elements contain a lang="en" tag though, the article content is all in english, and the dns server name is en.wikipedia.org. Nothing in the article source appears to reference language, chinese or otherwise.
I can't find any reference about non-content issues, maybe I'll have to contact OTRS? I'm running Firefox 73.0.1 on Manjaro Linux, but it seems unlikely to just be me, as every other page loads in english as normal, and this one persists after clearing cache and rebooting. --Vickas54 (talk) 07:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever the bug was, it's gone now. Perhaps it got cleaned up as part of adding the COVID-19 headers that are currently up, though I can't rule out changes/updates to my own system. --Vickas54 (talk) 16:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bug in page generator?