| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the JPEG article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | JPEG was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It's probably not DCT, it's flood fill !
editYou make a balanced flood fill over the source image that aborts when the average of all covered pixels differs with the current pixel by more than a tolerance limit. The covered area is then filled with the average value of all of it's pixels. When you compress the result with RLE or ZIP, you'll see that a lot of redundancy can be won without completely ruining the image. When the resulting image doesn't look that good or photorealistic, you can still interpolate the areas with sinus or cosinus formed shades and it will get a bit better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.143.68.134 (talk) 23:56, 2015 February 20 (UTC)
Wrong sizes in RLE
editI believe there is a mistake in part showing the result after RLE. There are no sizes 3 (2^3) even though it is possible to fit only 6 values to sizes 1 and 2 combined (2^1+2^2), but the quantized block has 8 values (1, -1; 2, -2, -3, -4; 5, -6). This is the part:
With this in mind, the sequence from earlier becomes: (0, 2)(-3);(1, 2)(-3);(0, 1)(-2);(0, 2)(-6);(0, 1)(2);(0, 1)(-4);(0, 1)(1);(0, 2)(-3);(0, 1)(1);(0, 1)(1); (0, 2)(5);(0, 1)(1);(0, 1)(2);(0, 1)(-1);(0, 1)(1);(0, 1)(-1);(0, 1)(2);(5, 1)(-1);(0, 1)(-1);(0, 0);
I believe this is the right sequence:
(0, 2)(-3);(1, 2)(-3);(0, 2)(-2);(0, 3)(-6);(0, 2)(2);(0, 2)(-4);(0, 1)(1);(0, 2)(-3);(0, 1)(1);(0, 1)(1); (0, 3)(5);(0, 1)(1);(0, 2)(2);(0, 1)(-1);(0, 1)(1);(0, 1)(-1);(0, 2)(2);(5, 1)(-1);(0, 1)(-1);(0, 0);
Am I right or am I missing something?
——
- I think so. Amplitude category appears to follow . See table F.2 [1]. The system for calculating this isn't elaborated on very much. --Merukit (talk) 06:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
References