Red compression and matrix tests

[Sarmoti]

Well, there's yer problem...



P.S. Had to use the uncompressed image... REDCODE got too blurry to tell if it's male or female...

[Brook Willard]

Now THAT'S great.

[Christopher Barry]

Sarmoti, that is awesome. Can RED do the same as in Blade Runner, see details around the corner, behind a door frame?

[Beat Takeshi]

LOL!
I thought i saw something in there.

[im.thatoneguy]

Thanks to all who obliged my request.

I think the large blocks in the first image are optimization patches. Graeme is probably coding it to isolate areas which have finer detail, in order to compress them differently from large even areas. Almost like an OctTree compression scheme. Which is really a good hybrid between your normal block encoders, except he's encoding within a basic block compression scheme.

My opinion on Jack's image isn't a focus issue. If that's from the uncompressed it's probably just a bunch number of hairs falling in an awkward place for the de-mosaic algorithm as was originally suggested.

Graeme I would pose one question to you: when I compress a JPEG2000 in photoshop there are two compression schemes, one of them generates funny little + marks. One of them always creates a clean image. Sorry I can't remember which is which (and again no workstation nearby). But I think the "Fast" one doesn't generate the + marks and actually creates in my opinion more accurate highly compressed images... are those visual + marks intersections of optimzation boxes? I can see one of the + in one of the first images, where some crankes the contrast on the compressed image... it worries me more than softness just because it's actually a visual artifact that looks digital. Any idea what those are? How to optimize those? Edit: (http://www.nicedissolve.com/images/redcode2.png) You can see them here.

[jack78]

Well, there's yer problem...

See? I told you guys there was something with the hair