 |
|
|
|
Next: I want a 400/500 f/5.6 IS/OS non-zoom lens . . .
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Nov 04, 2007
Posts: 1371
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:51 am
Post subject: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
"HD Photo has been announced by Microsoft and the Joint Photographic
Experts Group to be under consideration for a JPEG standard, tentatively
titled JPEG XR.
"The HD Photo bitstream specification claims that "HD Photo offers image
quality comparable to JPEG-2000 with computational and memory
performance more closely comparable to JPEG", that it "delivers a lossy
compressed image of better perceptive quality than JPEG at less than
half the file size", and that "lossless compressed images … are
typically 2.5 times smaller than the original uncompressed data".
http://blogs.msdn.com/billcrow/archive/2007/12/06/hd-photo-plug-ins-fo...hotosho
"HD Photo plug-ins for Adobe® Photoshop® CS2 and CS3 have been
officially released for both Windows and OSX. They're available now from
the Microsoft Download Center. [Links on this webpage]
"The Windows version is supported on Windows XP and Windows Vista, and
works with Photoshop CS2 and CS3. While not officially supported, it
will also work with limited features with older versions of Photoshop
and with Photoshop Elements. The included README file has details.
For PSE6, I installed it to
C:\Program Files\Adobe\Photoshop Elements 6.0\Plug-Ins\HD Photo Plugin
for Adobe Photoshop\
It works properly, as far as I can tell, for both Opening and Saving.
File size and processing speed seem consistent with the claims for the
format. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: May 17, 2007
Posts: 37
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 17, 2007
Posts: 37
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 5:22 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Feb 4, 3:13 am, John Navas <spamfilt... RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schn... RemoveThis @gmail.com>
> wrote in
> <239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae0... RemoveThis @m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt... RemoveThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>
> >I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
> >the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
>
> As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
> seems to live up to the claims:
> * Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
> * Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
> * Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
> * Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
> * Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
Interesting, in my tests I found different results. While it is faster
than Jpeg2000, compression and quality results were not positive.
Did anyone else take it for a spin?
Sachin Garg [India]
www.sachingarg.com | www.c10n.info >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 04, 2007
Posts: 1371
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schngrg.TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
wrote in
<239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae081a.TakeThisOut@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt....TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>
>I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
>the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
seems to live up to the claims:
* Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
* Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
* Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
* Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
* Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others) >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 27, 2007
Posts: 82
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:34 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Imported from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 17, 2007
Posts: 37
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:06 am
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Feb 4, 12:32 pm, John Navas <spamfilt... DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 17:22:08 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schn... DeleteThis @gmail.com>
> wrote in
> <f49fd2e0-faf8-4278-bd43-05f5d0e31... DeleteThis @m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >On Feb 4, 3:13 am, John Navas <spamfilt... DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schn... DeleteThis @gmail.com>
> >> wrote in
> >> <239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae0... DeleteThis @m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >> >On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt... DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>
> >> >I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
> >> >the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
>
> >> As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
> >> seems to live up to the claims:
> >> * Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
> >> * Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
> >> * Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
> >> * Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
> >> * Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
>
> >Interesting, in my tests I found different results. While it is faster
> >than Jpeg2000, compression and quality results were not positive.
>
> What I noticed is that starting with JPEG images, especially those with
> significant compression, gives poorer results with HD Photo than
> starting with uncompressed images (RAW, TIFF).
Yes that could be the case. My tests were also on uncompressed images
created direct from raw or scanned from film.
Sachin Garg [India]
www.sachingarg.com | www.c10n.info >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 27, 2007
Posts: 54
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:22 am
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
John Navas <spamfilt....DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> m....DeleteThis@mine.net wrote:
> >Why bother?
>
> In my case, I'm giving it serious consideration as an archive format.
> Sample image:
> PSD: 20.2 MB
> TIFF: 18.8 MB
> RAW: 17.6 MB
> PNG: 14.7 MB (no metadata)
> HD Photo: 11.4 MB
> JPEG2000: 11.2 MB
If those are typical images and at $100 for a 500GB HD, that's roughly
a cost basis of $0.004 for the largest size (yes, 4/10ths of a cent),
versus roughly half of that for the smallest. Even if you triple the
cost basis to add redundancy via extra platters), you're still only
talking about a difference of a half cent per image.
Per 10,000 images, that's only a whopping $50 difference.
Indeed - why bother!
-hh >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 04, 2007
Posts: 1371
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:32 am
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 17:22:08 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schngrg.TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
wrote in
<f49fd2e0-faf8-4278-bd43-05f5d0e317ac.TakeThisOut@m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>:
>On Feb 4, 3:13 am, John Navas <spamfilt....TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schn....TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
>> wrote in
>> <239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae0....TakeThisOut@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>>
>> >On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt....TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>>
>> >I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
>> >the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
>>
>> As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
>> seems to live up to the claims:
>> * Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
>> * Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
>> * Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
>> * Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
>> * Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
>
>Interesting, in my tests I found different results. While it is faster
>than Jpeg2000, compression and quality results were not positive.
What I noticed is that starting with JPEG images, especially those with
significant compression, gives poorer results with HD Photo than
starting with uncompressed images (RAW, TIFF).
--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others) >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 04, 2007
Posts: 1371
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:42 am
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:34:47 -0500, me.TakeThisOut@mine.net wrote in
<9u1dq3dij61b1p9kfqmnbul99vi269lqa4.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>:
>On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 17:22:08 -0800 (PST), in rec.photo.digital Sachin Garg
><schngrg.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Feb 4, 3:13 am, John Navas <spamfilt....TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schn....TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
>>> wrote in
>>> <239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae0....TakeThisOut@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>>>
>>> >On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt....TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>>>
>>> >I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
>>> >the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
>>>
>>> As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
>>> seems to live up to the claims:
>>> * Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
>>> * Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
>>> * Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
>>> * Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
>>> * Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
>>
>>Interesting, in my tests I found different results. While it is faster
>>than Jpeg2000, compression and quality results were not positive.
>>
>>Did anyone else take it for a spin?
>
>Why bother?
In my case, I'm giving it serious consideration as an archive format.
Sample image:
PSD: 20.2 MB
TIFF: 18.8 MB
RAW: 17.6 MB
PNG: 14.7 MB (no metadata)
HD Photo: 11.4 MB
JPEG2000: 11.2 MB
--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others) >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 7
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
John Navas schrieb:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schngrg DeleteThis @gmail.com>
> wrote in
> <239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae081a DeleteThis @m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>
>> On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt... DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>> I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
>> the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
>
> As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
> seems to live up to the claims:
> * Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
> * Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
> * Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
> * Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
> * Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
Do you have any data backing up your claim? I believe your claims that
it is able to handle 16bpp, and I also believe that it's faster than
JPEG2000 in general, but that's about all I buy. Are you potentially
a salesperson? If so, please indicate clearly. Thank you.
So long,
Thomas >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 17, 2007
Posts: 313
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <fo76if$sv8$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>, Thomas Richter
<thor.RemoveThis@math.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Do you have any data backing up your claim? I believe your claims that
> it is able to handle 16bpp, and I also believe that it's faster than
> JPEG2000 in general, but that's about all I buy. Are you potentially
> a salesperson? If so, please indicate clearly. Thank you.
Explanation - Navas is an idiot. >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 04, 2007
Posts: 1371
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:15:52 +0100, Thomas Richter
<thor.TakeThisOut@math.tu-berlin.de> wrote in
<fo76if$sv8$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>:
>John Navas schrieb:
>> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:06:59 -0800 (PST), Sachin Garg <schngrg.TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
>> wrote in
>> <239e9507-afa5-4348-ab6a-bb1ed9ae081a.TakeThisOut@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>>
>>> On Feb 3, 11:51 am, John Navas <spamfilt....TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hd_Photo
>>> I am curious if anyone has actually tried using it, did they notice
>>> the quality difference the the marketing material promises?
>>
>> As noted in my original post, I've done some modest testing, and it
>> seems to live up to the claims:
>> * Quality comparable to JPEG with greater compression
>> * Quality better than JPEG at the same compression
>> * Speed faster than JPEG2000 and comparable to JPEG
>> * Lossless size smaller than JPEG2000
>> * Support for 16-bit (and greater) color depth.
>
>Do you have any data backing up your claim? I believe your claims that
>it is able to handle 16bpp, and I also believe that it's faster than
>JPEG2000 in general, but that's about all I buy. Are you potentially
>a salesperson? If so, please indicate clearly. Thank you.
I don't do sales of any sort; I have no interest in HD Photo other than
as a potential user; and you are of course free to buy whatever you
wish.
--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others) >> Stay informed about: Microsoft HD Photo Plug-ins for Photoshop are Released |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | Photo editing software besides Photoshop? - Just got a new camera and was trying to upgrade my Photoshop software to CS2 to process the RAW pics. Discovered after downloading the purchase that CS2 doesn't support my camera.... so I immediately called to cancel the purchase. Too late... charge..
Difference between changing photo into B&W using Photoshop.. - I often shoot with RAWs just so I can change the photo to B/W and apply filter and toning effects. Is there a way to mimic this using Photoshop CS2? If not, what would be the closest approximation and what are the differences? David
Photoshop CS2 and RAM? - Hi, I'm thinking of buying CS2 (I have PS6). I'm concerned about RAM requirements. I have a 2.4GHz P4 with 512Mb RAM. I suspect a memory upgrade may be tricky due to the age of the PC. Is anyone out there running CS2 on a similar spec machine? Also is...
Using Photoshop To Get The Best Out Of RAW Images - I have quite a few RAW images on my PC, however I haven't learnt how to get the best out of them when converting them yet. Any recommendations on good Photoshop books (focusing more on the photography side of things) for learning how to mainly get the...
Photoshop CS2 vs. Photoshop Elements - I am slowly becoming comfortable with basic operations Photoshop CS2. Can someone please tell me what features Photoshop Elements has that aren't in Photoshop CS2? Bob |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
