Forum: Bryce


Subject: Jpeg Artifacts - Which looks better to you?

TheBryster opened this issue on May 03, 2003 ยท 49 posts


Incarnadine posted Mon, 05 May 2003 at 7:45 PM

I agree, 1024x768 are indeed dimensions. They are not print dimensions or pixel dimensions though! Corel PhotoPaint (and almost all other image manip tools) handle an image as a matrix of data values of y rows of x data points of 24 bit rgb cluster values. Additionally at the beginning of the image file is a header with the encoding algorythm parameters and the output scale factor info. This output scale factor is what actually sets the print resolution. Display resolution on the other hand is based upon the maximum density of the rgb phosphor elements on your screen (as determined by the phyical limits of putting all the holes in the shadow mask.)That density determines the ultimate resolution where each cluster equals one visual display pixel. Now if you have your display set at a resolution below that maximum, you will have each visual pixel (representing one data point in the array) comprising several rgb clusters. In Corel PhotoPaint there is an option under Resample to alter only the output scale factor and not the matrix of image data. If this is uncheck then the resample command acts directly on the data matrix and either interpolates down (removing data points, causing some degree of blur) or interpolates up (adding data points, causing some degree of pixellation). Jpeg compression works by summarizing a string of identical valued data points as the number of consecutive points of precisely RGB value x and throwing away the actual matrix values. Increasing the compression factor very roughly translates into toleranceing that value of x. This starts to corrupt the purity of the colour accuracy and with the loss of the data cannot be recovered from. It is these corruptions that we refer to as artifacts. Truce? (grin)

Pass no temptation lightly by, for one never knows when it may pass again!