AWARE [SYSTEMS] Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer
AWare Systems, Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer, Home TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive

LibTiff Mailing List

TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive
March 2000

Previous Thread
Next Thread

Previous by Thread
Next by Thread

Previous by Date
Next by Date

Contact

The TIFF Mailing List Homepage
This list is run by Frank Warmerdam
Archive maintained by AWare Systems



Valid HTML 4.01!



Thread

2000.03.30 10:53 "Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.03.30 13:33 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Frank Warmerdam
2000.03.30 13:56 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.03.30 15:07 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Chris Hanson
2000.03.30 16:44 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.03.30 19:12 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Cris Luengo
2000.03.31 11:34 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.03.31 15:14 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Max Martinez
2000.03.31 17:05 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.03.31 18:07 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Max Martinez
2000.03.31 18:12 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.03.31 18:31 "Fwd: RE: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri
2000.04.03 13:12 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Frank Warmerdam
2000.03.31 18:48 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Daniel Mccoy
2000.03.31 11:36 "Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri

2000.03.31 17:05 "Re: Complex Floating Point", by Antonio E Scuri

> The second approach would be to put the data all in one
> sample and signal this with an additional SampleFormat
> value (5 = Complex as a real, imaginary IEEE floating point pair).
> I don't think it is possible to produce universally understood
> complex without adding to the spec and I am interested
> in the outcome of this.

I agree with you. In fact my very first solution was to add a new 
SampleFormat value. It makes many things easier.

I was just wondering if we can reach another solution without changing 
specs. As you can see this is much more "complex"...

> I don't see yet, however, why you would need an additional type (13, 14) 
> as you suggested.

This is because you can have image attributes (Tags) that have complex 
values. So also you will need to add values to the FieldType in the 
IFDEntry definition.

scuri