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
April 2004

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

2004.04.15 00:26 "Large TIFF files", by Lynn Quam
2004.04.15 01:57 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Frank Warmerdam
2004.04.15 02:17 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Lynn Quam
2004.04.15 04:41 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.15 06:05 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.15 12:23 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Dan Smith
2004.04.15 13:33 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Frank Warmerdam
2004.04.15 21:51 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.16 17:23 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.17 02:50 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.20 08:29 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.20 14:20 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.21 07:06 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.20 20:44 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.21 07:30 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.21 17:54 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 07:38 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.22 18:21 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 18:34 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Thomas J Kacvinsky
2004.04.22 18:43 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 18:49 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.22 19:52 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Phillip Crews
2004.04.22 20:45 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Andrey Kiselev
2004.04.22 21:06 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 21:35 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.22 21:49 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.22 21:59 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 22:23 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.22 22:31 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.22 22:34 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 23:03 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.22 23:17 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.22 23:59 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.23 15:58 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Leonard Rosenthol
2004.04.26 14:50 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Marco Schmidt
2004.04.23 12:45 "Re: Large TIFF files", by John Aldridge
2004.04.23 13:12 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.23 20:37 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.23 22:31 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.23 22:38 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.23 22:58 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.26 10:03 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.26 14:32 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Bob Friesenhahn
2004.04.26 07:30 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.26 09:58 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.26 11:06 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.26 11:28 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.26 12:05 "Re: Large TIFF files", by John Aldridge
2004.04.26 12:33 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.26 12:53 "Re: Large TIFF files: explicitly different format", by Dan Smith
2004.04.26 13:16 "Re: Large TIFF files: explicitly different format", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.26 17:10 "Re: Large TIFF files: explicitly different format", by Chris Cox
2004.04.26 11:38 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Gerben Vos
2004.04.26 12:50 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Joris Van Damme
2004.04.27 06:12 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Rob Tillaart
2004.04.26 16:54 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.23 13:16 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Phillip Crews
2004.04.23 20:28 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Andrey Kiselev
2004.04.23 15:54 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Leonard Rosenthol
2004.04.22 10:32 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Gerben Vos
2004.04.22 18:41 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox
2004.04.22 19:45 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Dan Smith
2004.04.22 20:08 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox

2004.04.21 17:54 "Re: Large TIFF files", by Chris Cox

At 9:30 AM +0200 4/21/04, Rob van den Tillaart wrote:
> Chris Cox wrote:
> >
> > Professional Photoshop users needed 64 bit TIFF now.
> > Some high-end print users needed it about 3 years ago.
>
> How does Photoshop solves this need today?

Photoshop CS introduced a new filetype (PSB/Large Document Format) 
for documents over 30,000 pixels in either dimension and that uses 64 
bit offsets.   The format has to be enabled in preferences so that we 
can show dire warnings about the format compatibility.

But, it is not a public format, and there is no public library for 
reading the format.
So we really need a TIFF or TIFF like solution as well.
(and the last few times I brought it up the discussion didn't get anywhere)



> > I would break the possibilities down farther:
> >
> > 1) break with existing and keep as much compatibility as possible
> > 2) break with existing and keep only the good ideas, but not value
> > compatibility
> > (meaning that tag values will change, and we can clean out some cruft)
>
> Note that cruft has the nasty attribute of allways appearing again in
> some way :)

True - but we could also add things to the specification to try and 
prevent similar cruft from reappearing (or the same mistakes from 
being made again).

For instance - defining a mechanism for indicating which proprietary 
tags should be preserved, which tags should be removed, and which 
should be updated (preferably with public documentation on HOW to 
update them) when editing an image would help a LOT of situations 
(like @#$%@%# GEO-TIFF).

And defining an order of image compression operations (as an example: 
"decode in this order:   decompress, byte swap to platform native, 
reverse predictor, then apply scaling and inversion as necessary for 
your application") would also help developers understand how TIFF 
works and avoid problems when trying to define new schemes (some of 
which have broken this flow).


> > Some people have suggested that ASCII based tags would make debugging
> > far easier - and if we're going to 64 bit values we can use 8 byte
> > tags as well.
> >
> > tag: 'ICCProfl', 'Compress', etc.
>
> I like this idea but the BTIFF/BIF format is for computers first, a dump
> tool can make it human readable. Doubt if 8 chars will be enough
> remember the 8.3 filename style.

It would be better than 4 byte or 4 character tag types.
Arbitrarily sized tag types would make it a little more difficult to 
parse, even if it makes it easier to read.

And when writing the libraries, it's helpful to be able to read the 
file format in a hex editor ;-)
Also, sometimes it's useful to report or list the 
unknown/unrecognized tags for an end user - and the more information 
you have, the better.

>
> Reminds me that some time ago I was thinking about an XML version of
> TIFF.
> Readability would be improved (although XML considered readable??).
> We could use all kinds of XML tooling developed during the internet
> hype.
> The filesize would however expand at least with a factor 2, processing
> it takes extra overhead. Some time ago I read about an comparison 
> between ASN-1 coding (strict binary) and XML (strict ascii) and the 
> differences in performance went up to a factor 6. (in an IEEE magazine).

XML for images - that should remain a contradiction in terms.


Chris