Notice that old JPG does not support alpha channels (transparency). That means abandoning JPEG2000 would in fact force everyone with a single transparent pixel (even if just corners of round textures) to use lossless PNG for that, which is not optimal, to say the least.
Inté, Leonel -----Original Message----- From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com [mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Argent Stonecutter Sent: segunda-feira, 13 de Setembro de 2010 13:15 To: Tateru Nino Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] J2C fast decoder On 2010-09-13, at 00:40, Tateru Nino wrote: > If we're using HTTP textures, is there actually any need for the JPEG 2000 format? Since the transfer time of individual textures is vastly reduced (from the first byte to the last byte) the intermediate quality levels supported by jpg2k would seem to be redundant. I'm on a 256k DSL. I have HTTP textures enabled. I still see many intermediate texture levels. Also, for large textures, switching to PNG would likely increase the size of the transfer, which is not good. On the other hand, since both "old" JPG and PNG support progressive decoding, why not use PNG for lossless textures and JPG for lossy ones? Then you don't lose anything. _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges Nenhum vírus encontrado nessa mensagem recebida. Verificado por AVG - www.avgbrasil.com.br Versão: 9.0.851 / Banco de dados de vírus: 271.1.1/3128 - Data de Lançamento: 09/12/10 19:34:00 _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
