1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Microsoft seeks to standardise the HD Photo

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 9 Mar 2007.

  1. Tim S

    Tim S OG

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,881
    Likes Received:
    78
  2. airchie

    airchie New Member

    Joined:
    22 Mar 2005
    Posts:
    2,136
    Likes Received:
    2
    If its good and there's no license fees etc then I'm all for it.

    Is it going to start having some sort of DRM in it in future you think?
     
  3. samkiller42

    samkiller42 For i AM Cheesecake!!

    Joined:
    25 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    6,468
    Likes Received:
    132
    I think jpeg should stay for a little longer, its BMP i dont like, could we be able to wave good bye to bmp do you think?

    Sam
     
  4. mikeuk2004

    mikeuk2004 What you Looking at Fool!

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2004
    Posts:
    3,293
    Likes Received:
    11
    Well I cant retake my photos from the last 10 years so Jpeg will be with me for a very long time. Im all for it for a standard but I just hope that in 10, 20 years that I can still view my jpeg and the operating system still supports it, then im fine to move over the HD photo if the next digital camera i buy uses it which wont be for a few years yet as i only bought my 6mp Fuji F10 last year.
     
  5. David_Fitzy

    David_Fitzy I modded a keyboard once....

    Joined:
    8 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    206
    Likes Received:
    2
    MS could just kickstart it by sticking support into IE6/7 and selling cheap licences for the latest photo/web packages or if they really wanted to make a difference they'd make it free (Har Har)
     
  6. Darkedge

    Darkedge New Member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2004
    Posts:
    363
    Likes Received:
    0
    BMP has it's place, but programmers need to stop being bloody lazy and using it as a default format so it's only used when really needed, not just when people are muppets.

    what is wrong as PNG as a replacement for JPG?
     
  7. Skutbag

    Skutbag New Member

    Joined:
    17 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    317
    Likes Received:
    6
    If it's quality you want, then RAW is the only way surely? Memory cards are so gosh darned cheap now it's hardly like size is an issue...
    Sounds like a waste of time, would rather have JPEG v2 that was a more universal industry standard kind o thang.
     
  8. Nature

    Nature Member

    Joined:
    21 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    492
    Likes Received:
    1
    A pox on your crabs (and, or) ducks.
     
  9. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    Miss-spelled Microsoft near the end :p


    New standard sounds good, and if it's more efficient then JPEG, then sure why not. I hate it when JPEG dulls out pictures I convert into it to put on the net >.<
     
  10. Redbeaver

    Redbeaver The Other Red Meat

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2006
    Posts:
    2,057
    Likes Received:
    34
    so its going to have a .HD extension or somethin? lol

    byt he general rule of thumb, if its better, then im all for it..

    but one of the post above mentioned DRM on pictures media possibility and that kinda scares me lol
     
  11. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    Think it'll be more like .hdp (HD Photo)
     
  12. Ramble

    Ramble Ginger Nut

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    5,585
    Likes Received:
    40
    I don't think it's needed just yet. PNG works fine for now, and if a replacement with smaller file sizes was brought out that would be perfect.
     
  13. rowin4kicks

    rowin4kicks a man walked into a bar ...

    Joined:
    5 Feb 2006
    Posts:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    33
    i agree on the file sizes i have alot of large jpeg files that i am running out of places to store on a laptop
     
  14. Javerh

    Javerh Topiary Golem

    Joined:
    5 Sep 2006
    Posts:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    26
    PNG isn't really optimized to beat JPG. Will HD have an alpha-channel?
     
  15. Ramble

    Ramble Ginger Nut

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    5,585
    Likes Received:
    40
    It said 32-bit colour in the article so I'm assuming that means 24-bit colour and 8-bits for the alpha channel.
     
  16. smashie

    smashie Cupid Stunt

    Joined:
    2 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    561
    Likes Received:
    4
    True on the quality, shame it isn't a standard. Different Canons have different format RAW files. :wallbash:
     
  17. supermonkey

    supermonkey Deal with it

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    4,955
    Likes Received:
    201
    I don't know about you, but I really don't want to wait for my browser to load a page full of 20-30 MB images. Raw is simply too big. And as smashie pointed out, there isn't just one Raw format out there. All the various camera manufacturers have their own proprietary formats. Raw formats are great for, well, raw photos that will be worked and processed and fiddled with.

    What people are looking for here isn't necessarily the best quality image, but a better quality final output with equal or better compression than the current JPEG.

    -monkey
     
  18. DeX

    DeX Mube Codder

    Joined:
    22 Jul 2002
    Posts:
    4,152
    Likes Received:
    3
    It's about time jpeg was replaced. It's a pretty terrible format and its only remaining advantage is that it can compress photos pretty well. PNG is great for pretty much everything other than photos. Its lossless compressions is just too inefficient for photos.

    With Microsoft backing this new format it has a better chance of becoming standard. Lets face it, open formats just don't work. Why do people use gifs when PNGs are much better and free? Why do people still spend loads for the right to encode mp3s when OGG is better and free? Microsoft will hopefully push the format out enough to get enough manufacturers to take it up.
     
  19. bilbothebaggins

    bilbothebaggins New Member

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2006
    Posts:
    117
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wasn't there something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_2000 ... now I'm no expert whatsoever on image formats, but I don't quite see why we need yet another image standard. (Coming from M$ at that.)
     
  20. DeX

    DeX Mube Codder

    Joined:
    22 Jul 2002
    Posts:
    4,152
    Likes Received:
    3
    HD Photo is better than JPEG-2000. It's also designed to work well with portable devices. It also offers lossless compression so it's a good potential replacement for PNG or even RAW. How could you not see the need for a new image format when this offers all of those things?
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page