On Fri, May 15, 1998 at 07:43:55AM -0500, Bill Silver wrote: > There is a big difference between a 300 Mb text file and a 300 Mb graphics > file. I'm well aware of that, having done imaging work for over 15 years, including writing the code for a commercial CT scanner and for a cardiac analysis tool. > With graphics the rule is the higher the compression the low quality of the > resulting image(JPEG). If it's lossy compression, yes. Lossless compression has no effect on picture quality. Most maps compress incredibly well with the latter; and accepting even a small amount of picture degradation (visible only to those who know what to look for) allows pretty amazing compression ratios. > Even if this images were jpeged the file size for a printable file would > still take a hour plus to download. I don't see this as a problem. I download files in the 5-20 Mbyte range all the time, and I'm running at 28.8 at home. The shift to 56 Kbit modems appears to be really happening, and other technologies (cable modems, ADSL, ISDN, etc.) are also vying to increase bandwidth. In 1-2 years, I suspect that connections at 128 Kbits will be ordinary with 1 Mbit connections available and affordable. > The map images found on the xerox site are very low resolution and would be > impossible to navigate by. As I said, it's of prototype quality. It's simply intended to demonstrate the idea, and provide a platform for development and experimentation. ---Rsk Rich Kulawiec rsk_at_gsp.org *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************Received on Fri May 15 1998 - 05:45:01 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:29:56 PDT