Microsoft takes on JPEG with Windows Media Photo - bit-tech.net Forums

WilHarris · 26th May 2006, 10:00

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/05...s_Media_Photo/

Lazlow · 26th May 2006, 10:27

Oh dear. Do they really think that all the .jpg users will suddenly fall to their new format? And a replacement for .pdf is stupid - both formats are so heavily integrated into most people's computers that switching wouldn't benefit them at all.

It would be better if Microsoft stuck to supporting current (well established) formats, than trying to re-invent the wheel...

Hamish · 26th May 2006, 10:57

tenner says ie6 wont render it properly

ch424 · 26th May 2006, 11:06

Lazlow, of course people won't say "omgz need ot convert all my files to wmp", but they will use it. Look at WMA and AAC -- most of the people I know only have music in these proprietary formats. People claim that they're better than the much more accessible mp3 format, and those who don't know, use them because they're the default in their player of choice (media player and itunes.

Using the same logic (it's better and it's the default choice) WMP will be very popular.

ch424

jezmck · 26th May 2006, 11:33

Whether or not it really becomes popular, it's a stupid name.
Does it mean that non-photographic images can be saved using it? Also it overlaps with WMPlayer.

What do MS themselves gain by doing this?

EK-MDi · 26th May 2006, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by ch424

Lazlow, of course people won't say "omgz need ot convert all my files to wmp", but they will use it. Look at WMA and AAC -- most of the people I know only have music in these proprietary formats. People claim that they're better than the much more accessible mp3 format, and those who don't know, use them because they're the default in their player of choice (media player and itunes.

Using the same logic (it's better and it's the default choice) WMP will be very popular.

ch424

You took the words right out of my mouth.
Anyway, I hope it does get very popular. I mean, Bit-Tech did say: better quality, smaller size... hurray!

Cobalt · 26th May 2006, 11:50

As long as it is an open standdard then I will support it.

Meanmotion · 26th May 2006, 12:03

Couldn't care a toss unless the lossless is worthwhile. Any improvements over jpg using a lossy algorithm are surely going to be minimal.

TheoGeo · 26th May 2006, 12:43

i dont have a problem with it, aslong as its an open format.

my only complaint is microsoft using the same acronyms for everything. too many things start with wm already.
wm
wma
wmv
wmx
wmp

DeX · 26th May 2006, 12:50

Well JPG is a pretty poor lossy format when it comes to artifacts. Although it is particularly efficient for photos there's still loads of room for improvement. It will also be handy to have the option of taking photos using the lossless format which according to the spec will have about the same compression as PNG.

By the way the format extension will be WDP and not WMP for some strange reason.

I think it's a shame that there is not more widespread adoption of open standards. PNG is a perfectly suitable replacement for the (previously) costly GIF format yet everyone still uses GIFs. Ogg is a great alternative to other lossy audio encoders yet hardly anyone uses it still.

I think that if Microsoft release this image format for free use then it will be great as open source communities can't compete with the big bucks of MS and the like. Microsoft will also hopefully have the momentum to push the format's adoption by the digital camera and other manufacturers too.

In an ideal world all standards would be community develped and adopted by all but it seems proprietory formats are the only ones that work for complex formats such as image and video encoding.

Flibblebot · 26th May 2006, 12:50

What I'm unhappy about is the idea of Microsoft taking 2 de facto, (fairly) open, cross-platform standards and replacing them with its own possibly proprietary, possibly Windows-only standards.

Even if they are released as open standards, I doubt that MS will release them as fully-open; the cynic in me says that there are bound to be some features that they keep to themselves...

Yes, it will probably succeed (mostly , as ch424 said, through the ignorance of users who don't know any better), but that's not to say it'll be a good thing...

eddtox · 26th May 2006, 12:55

Anybody for a game of monopoly?

- ed out

EK-MDi · 26th May 2006, 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoGeo

i dont have a problem with it, aslong as its an open format.

my only complaint is microsoft using the same acronyms for everything. too many things start with wm already.
wm
wma
wmv
wmx
wmp

That's what makes it so great. It all fits together, and making sense, covering every area of media. Windows Media!

Bladestorm · 26th May 2006, 13:47

Its interesting that the specification sheet linked requires accepting a license agreement just to read it.

TGImages · 26th May 2006, 15:47

Unless you're using MS products to create the image I don't see much use or acceptance. Cameras are usually JPG or Raw and if you're shooting RAW you already know how and what you want to convert to. Most graphic libraries are JPG, GIF or TIF. Photoshop uses one of those or PSD.... Until (If) MS can convince the vendors that control the source of the image creation (camera manufacturers, etc.) then most users will still be creating and feeding the work flow with JPGs. In general it sounds to me like MS is trying to (yet again) create their own standard instead of playing nice with others.

-G

DXR_13KE · 26th May 2006, 16:34

DAMN YOU M$!!!! SHARE THE TOYS WITH THE OTHER KIDS!!!!!
M$ should be teaching monopoly101 they are so gooood at it.

JuMpErFLY · 26th May 2006, 17:49

sigh

I see a day where every file will end in .w*

As has been said, it'll only get used because it's the default which is never a good thing

yodasarmpit · 26th May 2006, 17:53

If it produces the quality of PNG with the compression of JPG then fair enough.

I tend to use PNG for most stuff due to no artifacts.

olly_lewis · 26th May 2006, 18:03

Wow antoehr useless program extention that will only feature of a hand full of pohotshop-esque files and be dead in 12 months.
For some reason it dont think that the majority of "funny image" websites like B3ta would say: "Upload your WMP file and click OK"...

EQC · 26th May 2006, 18:18

My question is:
- As we migrate to half the photos on the internet becoming this new WMP format (as half of all the videos are now WMV), how quickly will non-microsoft access be available: i.e.: for other operating systmes like Linux and MacOS's, and for other browsers like firefox?

Even with embedded WMV files now, there's still certain websites that just don't work at all with firefox (they make you download the video instead) and others where trying to close the page freezes firefox for about 15 seconds. And I'm still too dumb to use anything other than Windows...but how do other OS's handle WMV's, etc?

26th May 2006, 10:00	#1
WilHarris Just another nobody Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oxford Posts: 2,671	Microsoft takes on JPEG with Windows Media Photo http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/05...s_Media_Photo/

26th May 2006, 10:27	#2
Lazlow I have a dremel. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Lincoln, UK Posts: 1,464	Oh dear. Do they really think that all the .jpg users will suddenly fall to their new format? And a replacement for .pdf is stupid - both formats are so heavily integrated into most people's computers that switching wouldn't benefit them at all. It would be better if Microsoft stuck to supporting current (well established) formats, than trying to re-invent the wheel... __________________ Logs: Red Nineteen\|Pink PC Links: slickhouse.com\|Free file upload

26th May 2006, 11:33	#5
jezmck ____ Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Whiteley, Hants Posts: 4,085	Whether or not it really becomes popular, it's a stupid name. Does it mean that non-photographic images can be saved using it? Also it overlaps with WMPlayer. What do MS themselves gain by doing this? __________________ Have you seen The SketchUp Components Collection's latest items? Interested in a DXF Blueprints Collection? Discuss it here.

26th May 2006, 12:03	#8
Meanmotion Supermodder Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Bracknell nr. Ascot Posts: 370	Couldn't care a toss unless the lossless is worthwhile. Any improvements over jpg using a lossy algorithm are surely going to be minimal. __________________ Athlon64 X2 4400+ \|\| A8N SLI Premium \|\| 2Gb Corsair XMS Pro \|\| 2*40Gb Raptor (striped) \|\| 250GB External \|\| Radeon X1950Pro \|\| WinXP www.OutForBlood.co.uk \|\| www.4Qradio.com \|\| www.EdwardChester.co.uk

26th May 2006, 12:43	#9
TheoGeo What are these goddamn animals?! Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Reading Posts: 2,205	i dont have a problem with it, aslong as its an open format. my only complaint is microsoft using the same acronyms for everything. too many things start with wm already. wm wma wmv wmx wmp __________________ My Deviance -- My Music Athlon X2 4400+ -- 2GB Corsair XMS -- Geforce 7800GT -- Abit AN8-SLI -- 24" BenQ fp241w -- 74 gig raptor -- 1.6TB total storage -- 530w tagan psu Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there.

26th May 2006, 10:57	#3
Hamish I Mod, Therefore I Own Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: London Posts: 3,587	tenner says ie6 wont render it properly

26th May 2006, 11:06	#4
ch424 Design Warrior Join Date: May 2004 Location: Oxford, UK Posts: 2,510	Lazlow, of course people won't say "omgz need ot convert all my files to wmp", but they will use it. Look at WMA and AAC -- most of the people I know only have music in these proprietary formats. People claim that they're better than the much more accessible mp3 format, and those who don't know, use them because they're the default in their player of choice (media player and itunes. Using the same logic (it's better and it's the default choice) WMP will be very popular. ch424

26th May 2006, 11:50	#7
Cobalt Multimodder Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 248	As long as it is an open standdard then I will support it.

26th May 2006, 12:50	#10
DeX Mube Codder Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: London, UK Posts: 4,103	Well JPG is a pretty poor lossy format when it comes to artifacts. Although it is particularly efficient for photos there's still loads of room for improvement. It will also be handy to have the option of taking photos using the lossless format which according to the spec will have about the same compression as PNG. By the way the format extension will be WDP and not WMP for some strange reason. I think it's a shame that there is not more widespread adoption of open standards. PNG is a perfectly suitable replacement for the (previously) costly GIF format yet everyone still uses GIFs. Ogg is a great alternative to other lossy audio encoders yet hardly anyone uses it still. I think that if Microsoft release this image format for free use then it will be great as open source communities can't compete with the big bucks of MS and the like. Microsoft will also hopefully have the momentum to push the format's adoption by the digital camera and other manufacturers too. In an ideal world all standards would be community develped and adopted by all but it seems proprietory formats are the only ones that work for complex formats such as image and video encoding. __________________ Play my game: Shyguy's Cave of Death! If you dont have the time to check your spelling and grammar, you dont have the time to post! -Liquid K9

26th May 2006, 12:50	#11
Flibblebot Free from artificial flavourings Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Right here, right now Posts: 2,227	What I'm unhappy about is the idea of Microsoft taking 2 de facto, (fairly) open, cross-platform standards and replacing them with its own possibly proprietary, possibly Windows-only standards. Even if they are released as open standards, I doubt that MS will release them as fully-open; the cynic in me says that there are bound to be some features that they keep to themselves... Yes, it will probably succeed (mostly , as ch424 said, through the ignorance of users who don't know any better), but that's not to say it'll be a good thing... __________________ My uber-system: 66Mhz 486DX2, 8Mb RAM, 20Mb hard drive, 256 colour VGA adaptor (goes all the way up to 800x600!), keyboard AND serial mouse

26th May 2006, 12:55	#12
eddtox Supermodder Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Medway Posts: 345	Anybody for a game of monopoly? - ed out

26th May 2006, 13:47	#14
Bladestorm Hypermodder Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 682	Its interesting that the specification sheet linked requires accepting a license agreement just to read it. __________________ Athlon 64 X2 3800+ @ 250x10 (1.475v) \| EVGA GTX 260 55nm SSC \| A8N-SLI Premium \| 2x(4GB) Corsair Twinx2048-PC3200C2 \| Asus Xonar DX \| Antec truepower 550w \| Akasa Eclipse-62 DDC12VPlus1, DD TDX, 3/8 tygon r3603 tubing, PA120.2, DD double floppy bay res

26th May 2006, 15:47	#15
TGImages Grandpa Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Illinois, US Posts: 160	Unless you're using MS products to create the image I don't see much use or acceptance. Cameras are usually JPG or Raw and if you're shooting RAW you already know how and what you want to convert to. Most graphic libraries are JPG, GIF or TIF. Photoshop uses one of those or PSD.... Until (If) MS can convince the vendors that control the source of the image creation (camera manufacturers, etc.) then most users will still be creating and feeding the work flow with JPGs. In general it sounds to me like MS is trying to (yet again) create their own standard instead of playing nice with others. -G

26th May 2006, 16:34	#16
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,466	DAMN YOU M$!!!! SHARE THE TOYS WITH THE OTHER KIDS!!!!! M$ should be teaching monopoly101 they are so gooood at it. __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!

26th May 2006, 17:49	#17
JuMpErFLY Hypermodder Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Bangor, Wales Posts: 857	sigh I see a day where every file will end in .w* As has been said, it'll only get used because it's the default which is never a good thing

26th May 2006, 17:53	#18
yodasarmpit The other Brett. Moderator Join Date: May 2002 Location: West Lothian , Scotland Posts: 9,664	If it produces the quality of PNG with the compression of JPG then fair enough. I tend to use PNG for most stuff due to no artifacts. __________________ The Rt. Hon. Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson - "Ping Pong is coming home" www.yodasarmpit.com clickr my flickr

26th May 2006, 18:03	#19
olly_lewis Hypermodder Join Date: May 2006 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 756	Wow antoehr useless program extention that will only feature of a hand full of pohotshop-esque files and be dead in 12 months. For some reason it dont think that the majority of "funny image" websites like B3ta would say: "Upload your WMP file and click OK"... __________________ My signature dumped me... ___________

26th May 2006, 18:18	#20
EQC Multimodder Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: CA Posts: 220	My question is: - As we migrate to half the photos on the internet becoming this new WMP format (as half of all the videos are now WMV), how quickly will non-microsoft access be available: i.e.: for other operating systmes like Linux and MacOS's, and for other browsers like firefox? Even with embedded WMV files now, there's still certain websites that just don't work at all with firefox (they make you download the video instead) and others where trying to close the page freezes firefox for about 15 seconds. And I'm still too dumb to use anything other than Windows...but how do other OS's handle WMV's, etc?