2006.09.22 01:07 "[Tiff] Status of ISO JBIG and CIELAB JPEG support", by A Wandering LibTIFF User

2006.09.26 12:50 "Re[2]: [Tiff] Status of ISO JBIG and CIELAB JPEG support", by Jean-Yves Le Ridant

This lack of reference reader/writer/viewver is why I said to Joris about trying ICCLAB ( I understand that ITULAB is "great").

Are these standards too new to be adequately documented? Are they controlled by patent-enforcing companies which are aggressive litigators?

No, the main problem is that it avoid the vaste of cycles, bandwidth, and storage space.

Tell me about 3 x 128bits floating point RAW RGBA!


I DID try to find some reference images as well as a complete specification, but didn't find much at all.

The spec is complete, without the least ambiguïty. Another problem...

I have link, somewhere, must just find it...

a "jpegintiff CIELAB affair" for any purpose other that what PhotoShop can do ( in turn save a monochrome file with a well defined calibrated L grayscale ) is basically... hazardous.

I understand. It seems that the standard is too new and emergent to be very useful outside a very limited scope.

No, the problem is with and for the "old" CIELa*b* photometric. Somewhere, you'll need to use a jpeg codec in its "COLOR BLIND" mode, most of these are designed for unsigned 0... 2^N - 1 representations, and you can't assume what they do in range limiting at various points. Have a look to all the care of jpeglib about "CHAR" manipulations... ;-)

I'm puzzled as to why it was embraced and adopted by the facsimile hardware vendors.

cf above...

Designing a "modern" facsimile system without computer-based documents management and processing firmly in mind seems mentally deranged.

Hum..., ça se discute.