Making Do With Less Data

B

Bret Cahill

Guest
If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?


Bret Cahill
 
"Bret Cahill" wrote in message
news:c2be9e78-b9d5-4e49-9bfa-9195d8e6dc02@28g2000pry.googlegroups.com...

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?


Bret Cahill

Are we conserving data now Bret?
How about omitting every other dollar from your pay?
or, Omitting other from posts?

:) Tom
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
<Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?
Click to expand...
JPEG

John
 
Bret Cahill wrote:

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?
Click to expand...
Take a long list of such techniques and then apply one of them...

--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:43:07 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or
average every other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for
making do with less data?

JPEG
Click to expand...
PNG

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Network_Graphics>

quasi
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:51:24 -0500, quasi <quasi@null.set> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:43:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or
average every other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for
making do with less data?

JPEG format:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG

PNG format:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Network_Graphics
Click to expand...
TIFF format:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_Image_File_Format>

GIF format
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gif>

In my opinion, PNG format is the best overall.

quasi
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:

Probably none of the groups sci.math.num-analysis, sci.math, or
sci.electronics.basics are the best places for your question;
perhaps try <http://www.computervisiononline.com/forum> or
sci.image.processing, or google for image processing forums.

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.
Click to expand...
You haven't said with any precision what it is you want to accomplish.
Some other posters mention jpeg and png image storage methods, which
apply data compression methods to images, but my impression is that
what you are asking about is methods of image resizing.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do with
less data?
Click to expand...
As a starting point, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_scaling>,
which lists several resizing methods: Bicubic interpolation,
Bilinear interpolation, Lanczos resampling (windowed sinc filter),
Seam carving (as in <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIFCV2spKtg>)
Spline interpolation, and Supersampling, but for some reason doesn't
mention Genuine Fractals (see following URL for that).
<http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/07/better-image-resizing.html>
For some brief explanations about resizing and some example pictures:
<http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/image-interpolation.htm>

Image processing programs like gimp, Photoshop, and Paint each
implement several of the methods mentioned above.

--
jiw
<http://yume3.sourceforge.net/>
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:51:24 -0500, quasi <quasi@null.set> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:43:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or
average every other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for
making do with less data?

JPEG

PNG
Click to expand...
Ok, you win, your list is shorter than mine.

John
 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tom Biasi wrote:

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?


Bret Cahill

Are we conserving data now Bret?
How about omitting every other dollar from your pay?
or, Omitting other from posts?
Click to expand...
L L



mike




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOBndgAAoJEANcw8vDgglCfngIALPeTeGjWoVqm5BMer8ElSD8
ZAX79Hi7qTmb2vv06TsceLlMwncFmxg4C0dtKm9Okq6DyG/uy9/DZfbtCQrvzNJK
kRwghTVge+ino4ILEkPFpLpmBbbMn+eFk/6MYwEnL6scTGbAv3j/GZF1UEc0T3JB
d4IwlRf5WCp7WH6KlK4DIwxbe44NVSJwGbxu3Jc6QnPbm/bVW3wq7h8l3gkAfgUF
WPWOv/swQKXahroIu6O3JIML15Ak8G+ecISRTtZWhaVg2XRt01dgy2ZKK3Hv8rMb
TEJ/p6lq8/o921qyOMLsZVSv+5GJh4FN8iLxHWBgfCDqgPtH1AS2Im8MRgNJIUY=
=VwK1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Probably none of the groups sci.math.num-analysis, sci.math, or
sci.electronics.basics are the best places for your question;
perhaps try <http://www.computervisiononline.com/forum> or
sci.image.processing, or google for image processing forums.

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

You haven't said with any precision what it is you want to accomplish.
Click to expand...
True but this is a very general discussion.

Some other posters mention jpeg and png image storage methods, which
apply data compression methods to images, but my impression is that
what you are asking about is methods of image resizing.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do with
less data?

As a starting point, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_scaling>,
which lists several resizing methods:  Bicubic interpolation,
Bilinear interpolation, Lanczos resampling (windowed sinc filter),
Seam carving (as in <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIFCV2spKtg>)
Spline interpolation, and Supersampling, but for some reason doesn't
mention Genuine Fractals (see following URL for that).
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/07/better-image-resizing.html
For some brief explanations about resizing and some example pictures:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/image-interpolation.htm

Image processing programs like gimp, Photoshop, and Paint each
implement several of the methods mentioned above.
Click to expand...
A year or so ago NPR had something about saving time [$] on CAT scans
or MRIs.


Bret Cahill
 
On 2011-06-25, Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossy_compression


--
Tim
 
John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:51:24 -0500, quasi <quasi@null.set> wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:43:07 -0700, John Larkin
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or
average every other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for
making do with less data?

JPEG

PNG

Ok, you win, your list is shorter than mine.

The way I heard it, JPEG is a "lossy" compression algorithm, and the
Click to expand...
others aren't, for whatever that's worth. Then again, Bret was talking
about throwing away data in the first place.

Thanks,
Rich
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:21:29 -0400, "Tom Biasi" <tombiasi@optonline.net>
wrote:

"Bret Cahill" wrote in message
news:c2be9e78-b9d5-4e49-9bfa-9195d8e6dc02@28g2000pry.googlegroups.com...

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?


Bret Cahill

Are we conserving data now Bret?
How about omitting every other dollar from your pay?
or, Omitting other from posts?
Click to expand...
How about omitting every other Cahill post? ...or better, all of them.
 
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:21:29 -0400, "Tom Biasi" <tombiasi@optonline.net
"Bret Cahill" wrote in message

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?

Are we conserving data now Bret?
How about omitting every other dollar from your pay?
or, Omitting other from posts?

How about omitting every other Cahill post? ...or better, all of them.
Click to expand...
Why not just use his posts as a source of cheap amusement, like we do with
yours and Jim's and Michael's? >:->

Starbuck's kind of fun sometimes, and Phil's always good for at least a
groan. >:->

One of the biggest laughs I got was at a seminar, where the lecturer was
talking about how to deal with stupid traffic without giving yourself
apoplexy - I got the mic, and said, "Think of the antics of the stupid
drivers as a form of entertainment."

Laughter ensued. It felt good. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:15:11 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:

If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.
Click to expand...
In a sense, this idea is spot on. Certain image compression
techniques will omit the spatial high frequency components in
an attempt to get by with much less data. This involves "looking"
at the image in a different way, i.e. its frequency space via DFT
(FFT).
 
Bret Cahill wrote:
If [...]
Click to expand...
_Fewer_ data.

--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting
 
Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> wrote in
news:4E08E06E.BCAEC9D9@btinternet.com:

Bret Cahill wrote:

If [...]

_Fewer_ data.
Click to expand...
No. "Less" is correct. Data is both plural and singular in
construction, so it may correctly take singular verbs, singular
modifiers and singular pronouns. English is not Latin;
"data" is not just the plural of "datum."

--
Cheerfully resisting change since 1959.
 
In article <c2be9e78-b9d5-4e49-9bfa-9195d8e6dc02@
28g2000pry.googlegroups.com>, Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com says...
If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?
Click to expand...
There are two ways to make a pile of data smaller:
1. Lossless compression
2. Lossy compression
Try nosing around over in news:comp.compression after reading their FAQ
 
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 14:59:58 -0700, Dann Corbit wrote:

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do with
less data?

There are two ways to make a pile of data smaller: 1. Lossless
compression
2. Lossy compression
Click to expand...
Since the original question concerns "making do with less
data," your response is not strictly correct.

Lossless compression discards nothing, hence we are not not
making do with less.

Lossy compression does discard data, although not in the
spatial intensity domain that the OP assumes. Thus only
by using lossy compression do we make do with less.
 
On 6/25/2011 11:15 AM, Bret Cahill wrote:
If you wanted to make an image you could simply omit or average every
other pixel.

Is there a short list on the most popular techniques for making do
with less data?
Click to expand...
Here's an idea...
First figure out how many different colors the image has.
Store just one pixel of each color in the file (huge savings right there!)
Then map the position of each color in x, y coordinates.

When loaded the mostly text file simply copies a color pixel and puts it
in all the locations specified in the coordinates.


--
-Scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top