Thread

2008.01.23 17:40 "[Tiff] tiff library and exif", by Jamie L. Finch

2008.02.06 18:40 "[Tiff] tiff library and exif", by Jamie L. Finch

2008.02.06 20:03 "[Tiff] Bug in tif_print.c for TIFFTAG_REFERENCEBLACKWHITE", by Edward Lam

2008.02.15 14:36 "[Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by John

2008.02.15 14:57 "RE: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by Ed Grissom

2008.02.15 15:02 "Re: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by John

2008.02.15 15:14 "RE: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by Ed Grissom

2008.02.18 10:44 "RE: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by Gerben Vos

2008.02.18 12:29 "Re: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by John

2008.02.18 13:12 "Re: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by

2008.02.18 14:23 "Re: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by

2008.02.15 17:51 "RE: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by Bob Friesenhahn

2008.02.15 15:02 "Re: [Tiff] bug? JPEGQUALITY seems not to be read correctly", by John

On 15/02/2008, Grissom, Ed <ed.grissom@intergraph.com> wrote:

There is no place in the header for a "quality" setting. This is not something that is in the JPEG spec or the TIFF spec. What is in both specs is a quality table (q-table). This q-table is generated from the q-setting.

It is difficult to recreate the q-setting that was used to create a q-table.

Ah OK, thanks. But tiff could have a tag in the header which hinted at the Q setting which was used to make the table, couldn't it? It would make the operation of things like tiffcp more predictable.

John