Talk:Lossless JPEG

message: Is JPEG-LS subject to patents in any developed country that require payment by implementors? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 14:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fairly sure that JPEG-LS is subject to patents, but that its license requires no payments for use (see HP's license for JPEG-LS, which I haven't read all of, to be sure). Calbaer 21:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patents? 

message: since this covers all 3 lossless JPEG formats shouldn't it be titled appropriately, i propose "lossless variants of JPEG" Plugwash 17:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  title 

message: The JPEG lossless compression article doesn't contain anything interesting, there was a "Merge" proposal, but its discussion page was deleted. Shouldn't it be simply redirected to the Lossless JPEG page? cojoco (talk) 00:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And you've done it!  Excellent, thanks. cojoco (talk) 11:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Or rather, excellent thanks to Plugwash! cojoco (talk) 11:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[JPEG Lossless Compression]] 

message: This article is listed in :Category:Lossy_compression_algorithms, which I find quite paradoxal given its title, but I am not sure I should just remove it. Ffx (talk) 13:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: I think a section to this effect would be in order.  Does anybody here have the expertise to write it? -- Smjg (talk) 19:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, PNG is highly optimized for "cartoony" or "diagram"-type images, with fairly large areas of flat color, while most photographically-oriented compression processes are designed to accomodate a little "noise", or random variation inherent in digitizing information captured from external sources... AnonMoos (talk) 02:06, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Maybe, but your statement is in no way specific to lossless JPEG.  Most other photographically-oriented compression processes I know of are lossy, so this would need special treatment. -- Smjg (talk) 13:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The probable result of a PNG / Lossless JPEG comparison test would be that PNG would beat the pants off of Lossless JPEG for certain restricted types of images which PNG handles very well, while Lossless JPG would have a consistent (though not necessarily large) advantage over PNG for other types of images... AnonMoos (talk) 15:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with PNG? 

message: I cannot find anything about this in the DCT article. Maybe we should name the real problems: Reduced color resolution and quantization. It would, for example, be possible to use the lossy jpeg, and use an entropy coder to save the residual errors. Speed/compression may not be that good. --Arnero (talk) 15:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  about: "since the Inverse DCT is not rigorously defined" 

message: * Where is the "Fig. 3" that is mentioned in the text?
* What is C?
--RokerHRO (talk) 12:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You just need to scroll up. It's referring to the figures that were previously used to discuss plain lossless JPEG. — trlkly 07:45, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section "LOCO-I" is copy-vio? 

message: The article says about LL mode of standard JPEG:
This mode is quite popular in the medical imaging field, and defined as an option in DNG standard, but otherwise it is not very widely used because of complexity of doing arithmetics on 10, 12 or 14bpp values on typical embedded 32bit processor and a little resulting gain in space.
But this LL-mode of standard JPEG is used by cameras (Canon CR2, Adobe DNG,...) to encode RAW image data. Probably because these arithmetics are the easiest way on embedded hardware.
--77.8.118.19 (talk) 03:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  ll-mode 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Lossless JPEG. 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/20060702065816/http://www.jpeg.org/public/wg1n1816.pdf to http://www.jpeg.org/public/wg1n1816.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222122555/http://itohws03.ee.noda.sut.ac.jp/~matsuda/mrp/ to http://itohws03.ee.noda.sut.ac.jp/~matsuda/mrp/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060702065816/http://www.jpeg.org/public/wg1n1816.pdf to http://www.jpeg.org/public/wg1n1816.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222122555/http://itohws03.ee.noda.sut.ac.jp/~matsuda/mrp/ to http://itohws03.ee.noda.sut.ac.jp/~matsuda/mrp
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) 13:45, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Lossless JPEG (1993) is supported for read and write in Jasc Paint Shop Pro version 9. The compression is poor.
There is a JPEG-LS plugin for Adobe Photoshop provided by Hewlett-Packard (on the Wayback Machine). It supports color channel decorrelation, which improves the compression ratio greatly compared to IrfanView, and is comparable to XL at effort 3. All applications with an LS plugin still support these files.
-- J7n (talk) 21:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support in common applications