Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pioneer!hultquis
From: hultquis@pioneer.arpa (Jeff P.M. Hultquist)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Fractal Compression
Keywords: not *my* bits, you don't!
Message-ID: <9404@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 26 May 88 17:35:22 GMT
Sender: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: hultquis@pioneer.UUCP (Jeff P.M. Hultquist)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 18

>>In article <522@etn-rad.UUCP> jru@etn-rad.UUCP writes:
>>
>>    An exact representation of the original image is impossible, digitalization
>>allways includes approximations. Instead of searching error-free compression
>>algorithms, why not digitize at twice the resolution and use an approximate
>>compression. 

First, because if I pay lot of time and money to digitize four (or
eight) times as many bits, I am *not* about to throw those bits away
just so I can use a "cute" compression algorithm.

Second, with exact compression and original data, I know accurate my
image is.  With some adaptive compression, I am no longer able to
trust any thing I see.  "Is that thing *data*, or did the compression
algorithm produce it?"

Jeff Hultquist		hultquis@{ pioneer.arc.nasa.gov	}
(415) 694-4970		         { ames-pioneer.arpa    }