PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft shows off JPEG rival


avinashlobo
05-25-2006, 05:37 AM
New Windows Media Photo format promises images that offer better quality at half the size of JPEG files.

http://news.com.com/Microsoft+shows+off+JPEG+rival/2100-1025_3-6076650.html?tag=nefd.top

Breinmeester
05-25-2006, 07:42 AM
Sounds good. I hope it has an alpha option.

tciny
05-25-2006, 07:55 AM
Dear Lord I hope it fails miserably. Sorry if this sounds patronizing, but it's just that this will be another closed format that will make it harder for open source and free software projects to succeed on the market.
It's why Jpeg2000 failed and I hope it's the same for this one. If you want to create a new standard, it has to be an open format. As they said "Licensing can kill this". Yet they're only talking about the big players like Adobe.
I just remember how e.g. PHP and many other projects had to drop GIF support until the patent expired. I don't want to pay for products like Firefox, or see them go down the drain, just because it can or cant read Microsofts new image format, that's become a new standard because still, most people use Windows Boxen and their new pirated Photoshop that supports the format... for free.

PS: They plan to reduce battery usage with this format? Like how?! Any advanced compression algorithm I've seen so far requires more CPU power than the last one... thus requiring more battery power.

sforsyth
05-25-2006, 08:04 AM
Agreed 100%. The licensing on this is by far the biggest issue, strange to hear MS come unprepared on that side of things when announcing it. Can't see why too many people would want to adopt it if it's in any way off-putting.

ThE_JacO
05-25-2006, 08:15 AM
a closed format? no thanks.
not to mention that the average computer coming out of a cheap OEM manufacture nowadays has 80 or more GB of disk space free, if people fill up their disks it's because of movies, games with 4GB installs, 2GB office installs, 2GB of bloat in the next OS...

saving disk space on JPGs isn't gonna change anybody's life except for PDA and photocamera owners, and I really, really hope that the standard is gonna fail miserably in those regards.

if anything what we need is to popularize a version of a more flexible format like EXR, and transcending the bloody 8bit*3channels crap.

none of todays shortcomings or necessities can be addressed by a quality drop compressed closed format.

ThE_JacO
05-25-2006, 08:19 AM
PS: They plan to reduce battery usage with this format? Like how?! Any advanced compression algorithm I've seen so far requires more CPU power than the last one... thus requiring more battery power.

data throughput and writing, especially on disk based CF and the future SD cards, is the 2nd or 3rd most powerconsuming task performed by PDAs or DigiCams.
reducing data transfer and a more trasnfer friendly bytestream would both help with battery life, probably outweighting the higher computing needs.
Shame that such things account for maybe 2% longer battery life when you take into account that display luminosity, dispersion, flashes, cheap engineering and lens servos actually account for 90% of the power consumption.

albedo4800hp
05-25-2006, 08:19 AM
a closed format? no thanks.
saving disk space on JPGs isn't gonna change anybody's life except for PDA and photocamera owners, and I really, really hope that the standard is gonna fail miserably in those regards.


And that is exactly where they are aiming for. Since it will reduce costs and energy. Less flash memory required, less battery capacity needed. And in the end it means save $ for consumers!

ThE_JacO
05-25-2006, 08:21 AM
And that is exactly where they are aiming for. Since it will reduce costs and energy. Less flash memory required, less battery capacity needed. And in the end it means save $ for consumers!

I'm not saying they won't succeed, the problem with this format is that it's something they will be able to market marvelously to the large-scale markets.

What I'm saying is that it's an un-needed PoS scheme and that I hope that, just for once, the f***ing marketing manouver will fail in favour of the many, more needed and better open alternatives.

tciny
05-25-2006, 08:31 AM
Again, I dont believe the claim that it saves battery power. I havent seen any more advanced codec that required less processing power than the last one.
Even then, as a consumer I prefer the format that works seamlessly with all the other software I have. What good are smaller files when I can't use them anywhere besides Microsofts or Adobes programs?
Apple has a strong share in the professional photographers market and steadily gains in the consumer segment... and I just don't see Apple adopting a proprietary Microsoft format that they have no possibility of influencing.
It isnt the first time Microsoft's proposing a new image format.

Breinmeester
05-25-2006, 08:45 AM
I don't think any closed format will become a standard nowadays. If it will, sure enough soon there'll be an open format with the same features for the internet. Why would anyone build a website with images only IE can read? If it doesn't get the support on the consumer end, it'll die a slow death. MS will have to sort this licensing stuff out.
I think it would be nice to be able to shoot my stop motion projects with such a format, reducing needed space and having a better quality image.

tciny
05-25-2006, 08:57 AM
Unfortunately open source formats dont always succeed in favour of proprietary ones. Just look at mp3 and ogg... although latter one is superior in almost any respect except for processing power needed for en-/decoding.

ThE_JacO
05-25-2006, 09:06 AM
I don't think any closed format will become a standard nowadays. If it will, sure enough soon there'll be an open format with the same features for the internet. Why would anyone build a website with images only IE can read? If it doesn't get the support on the consumer end, it'll die a slow death. MS will have to sort this licensing stuff out.
I think it would be nice to be able to shoot my stop motion projects with such a format, reducing needed space and having a better quality image.

are you sure about that?
internet expolorer is still so dominant that people have to work around so many dumb design issues it's not fun.
sure, the next one promises tabs and W3 compatibility, but it wouldn't be the first time that MS affects something as big as the internet directly.

PNG is an infinitely better standard then bitmap, but if you run a search about which one is third in page presence after jpg and gif you might be in for a surprise.

mech7
05-25-2006, 09:12 AM
Great what's next not being able to watch your photos on the mac and linux..

PyRoT
05-25-2006, 09:47 AM
PNG files are great IMO, they have greater ranges of color if you need them and they have alpha. open source, good size.. all sweet..

tciny
05-25-2006, 11:57 AM
About png: Theres a thing called "pngbehaviour" that makes IE display pngs with correct alpha. Just include the file and insert 4 files into your page stylesheet. It's a bit ugly when using DOM to read the image urls, but other than that it works incredibly well.

mech7
05-25-2006, 12:03 PM
Unfortunatly there are a few issues with this solution, what it does is just inserts the IE filter so it does not break with webstandards and proper browsers don't have to deal with the "funny" tags... But you will loose all mouse behaviours if you use it as a bg image. So links, text selection etc it's all gone :(

About png: Theres a thing called "pngbehaviour" that makes IE display pngs with correct alpha. Just include the file and insert 4 files into your page stylesheet. It's a bit ugly when using DOM to read the image urls, but other than that it works incredibly well.

tevih
05-25-2006, 12:31 PM
are you sure about that?
internet expolorer is still so dominant that people have to work around so many dumb design issues it's not fun.
sure, the next one promises tabs and W3 compatibility, but it wouldn't be the first time that MS affects something as big as the internet directly.

PNG is an infinitely better standard then bitmap, but if you run a search about which one is third in page presence after jpg and gif you might be in for a surprise.

I'd rather see PNG take off before anything else comes to market.

But, another use of better image compression is the web. There's still plenty of people across many different demographics and in different parts of the world who still don't have boadband! Better compression would definitely make a difference. (assuming their computers could read the new format - having dialup may [but not necessarily] mean they're behind in computer hardware/software.)

As a designer, I'll say this - I design for *every* browser in mind. Generally Firefox first, IE second and the rest follow. Meaning, things looks best in FF, whereas certain design features will look fine in IE but you're not always getting the best. (Such as semi-transparent PNG or some css). As a designer, and I'm sure I speak for many of us, MS is a major pain as they consistently refuse to do things set by w3c standards. Designers won't design for IE and leave other browsers behind.

Can't stand these companies who try and create exclusivity. That goes for mac AND microsoft.

amfantasy
05-25-2006, 12:41 PM
???Linux version.......people use link for professional work I think it needs a copy

Beamtracer
05-25-2006, 09:49 PM
Like most of the people above, it worries me that this is a closed image format.

The article states that the intention of this format is for use in digital cameras and portable devices. That worries me even more.

If I purchase a camera, I want the images to be viewable on whatever device I want to use, and whatever OS I want to use. I don't want my images tied down to any single OS. I want my images viewable on every OS.

Being able to view the images on Linux and other open source software is also important. Many portable devices are now running on Linux.

harlan_hill
05-26-2006, 02:00 AM
leave it to M$ to name a product "WIMP" errr.... "WMP" ;)

TumikSmacker
05-26-2006, 04:35 AM
great...*right click, save picture as*

"YOU DO NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO..."

We probably wont be able to print screen anything either lol

tozz
05-26-2006, 01:20 PM
are you sure about that?
internet expolorer is still so dominant that people have to work around so many dumb design issues it's not fun.
sure, the next one promises tabs and W3 compatibility, but it wouldn't be the first time that MS affects something as big as the internet directly.

PNG is an infinitely better standard then bitmap, but if you run a search about which one is third in page presence after jpg and gif you might be in for a surprise.
Well, it offers _some_ W3 compatibilty, they've said it will be far from current offerings by Mozilla and Opera. It's a shame really, focusing more on fancy icons than correct rendering of web pages. As for the domination it's getting better, Opera 9 will take a big chunk and Firefox gains more and more every day.
great...*right click, save picture as*

"YOU DO NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO..."

We probably wont be able to print screen anything either lol
That would actually be one of the best thing to happen to the Internet in years. A good way to protect content. Photographers and artists would be thrilled.

Rick Flowers
05-26-2006, 04:42 PM
tozz, would they really be thrilled?

or would they lose another tool.

Seriously, I am a photographer, and an artist, and creator of things- do I care if someone printscreens my work? no.

If a client wants their stuff protected, there are ways to handicapp that function.


This is bad. period.

As if we are having a problem with JPEG sizes?!?

We have broadband. 300+GB hard drives.
Do we really need our image archive to be half its size?

NO.

Do we really need a new pointless image format when we already have 5-10 that serve their purpose just fine?

tozz
05-26-2006, 07:36 PM
tozz, would they really be thrilled?

or would they lose another tool.

Seriously, I am a photographer, and an artist, and creator of things- do I care if someone printscreens my work? no.

If a client wants their stuff protected, there are ways to handicapp that function.


This is bad. period.

As if we are having a problem with JPEG sizes?!?

We have broadband. 300+GB hard drives.
Do we really need our image archive to be half its size?

NO.

Do we really need a new pointless image format when we already have 5-10 that serve their purpose just fine?

Well I know for a fact people who has had content stolen and used for commerical purposes. Sure you can put a big red tag over the image, but then you're not showing your work, your showing your work with a big red tag. There's currently no way of showing content online (images) without destroying it if you want to protect it. If you don't want to protect it, you wouldn't have to, options are nice imo.

EricLyman
05-27-2006, 04:30 AM
As if we are having a problem with JPEG sizes?!?

We have broadband. 300+GB hard drives.
Do we really need our image archive to be half its size?

NO.


Weeeellll, this is a good point, but regardless people would still go for it if it could cut your data size in half. I'd love to cut my digital photo album's size in half...Would save me about 6 gigs. But if it's a closed format, then forget it. I almost adopted the microsoft audio file format (wma?) for the same reason years ago, before someone warned me against it. Now I've got an iPod so you can imagine how happy I am that I kept everything MP3 :)

Rick Flowers
05-27-2006, 05:36 AM
Who dare put a red tag on their artwork? Seriously... get Real on the subject.

Do any of the submissions here recently have a big visible watermark covering the artwork? No...Not really..
If I wanted to, I could rip and steal all over the place, deviantart, photography forums, cgtalk, etc etc... but do I want to? No. Is it easy? yes.

Rarely do artists desire to steal from other artist. A thief is short lived.


Any argument for this format (that I can think of) is weak and filled with imagination.

ThE_JacO
05-27-2006, 05:45 AM
Any argument for this format (that I can think of) is weak and filled with imagination.

well... despising closed standards for such a universal medium, used in such an important part of the distribution chain (webpages) is enough of a concern honestly.

it would be like saying that MS will use a closed, and copyright protected, standard for VP7. Would you be happy about networking operations running on a closed standard? with the possible eventuality that, if it catches big time, you might be charged by BW for packets in your internal network?

It's a bit of an extreme example, but it's not so far fetched, and it's surely related to something as important as the image format of choice for the internet.

nothing closed and blackboxed like that should be accepted into world wide information streams in my opinion, at least not forcefully.

GatorNic
05-27-2006, 05:55 AM
About png: Theres a thing called "pngbehaviour" that makes IE display pngs with correct alpha. Just include the file and insert 4 files into your page stylesheet. It's a bit ugly when using DOM to read the image urls, but other than that it works incredibly well.

off topic but...

I used pngbehavior for a bit but it definitly had its problems. I instead use and awesome php script. I use it on my webpage for partial alpha transparent png's. It works perfectly and I have tried it in almost every brower I could find (well except some extremely old browsers). Check it out....

http://koivi.com/ie-png-transparency/

tuna
05-27-2006, 05:56 AM
Who dare put a red tag on their artwork? Seriously... get Real on the subject.

Do any of the submissions here recently have a big visible watermark covering the artwork? No...Not really..
If I wanted to, I could rip and steal all over the place, deviantart, photography forums, cgtalk, etc etc... but do I want to? No. Is it easy? yes.

Rarely do artists desire to steal from other artist. A thief is short lived.


You're nullifying the idea of copy protection on the basis that you, alone, wouldn't steal people's images? Because you don't murder people either, does that mean the idea of self-defence is pointless?

There have been loads of threads on this forum where people have had their work stolen and placed on products to be sold. Have you checked ebaums world recently? They steal people's images and movies and remove the creator's watermarks and replace it with their own "ebaums" watermarks as if they created it themselves, leaving no credit to the real author. The traffic generated by a cultivated stealing of all these images generates that site's owner revenue.

I'm glad you enjoy the idea that people can earn money by taking your images, but I and many others, don't.

tozz
05-27-2006, 08:28 AM
You're nullifying the idea of copy protection on the basis that you, alone, wouldn't steal people's images? Because you don't murder people either, does that mean the idea of self-defence is pointless?

There have been loads of threads on this forum where people have had their work stolen and placed on products to be sold. Have you checked ebaums world recently? They steal people's images and movies and remove the creator's watermarks and replace it with their own "ebaums" watermarks as if they created it themselves, leaving no credit to the real author. The traffic generated by a cultivated stealing of all these images generates that site's owner revenue.

I'm glad you enjoy the idea that people can earn money by taking your images, but I and many others, don't.
Exactly. Ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away, theft is indeed a big problem for many people publishing work on the internet.
And Rick, who said you wanted to? There's a bigger world outside.

avinashlobo
05-28-2006, 05:31 AM
leave it to M$ to name a product "WIMP" errr.... "WMP" ;)Well, it is Windows Media Photo, so I guess WiMP is fair enough. Unfortunately, the monicker's been taken by the other WiMP - Windows Media Player that is, so they'll have to do something to set apart these two WiMPs.

On a side note - don't write "M$". It's just really wimpy.

Rick Flowers
05-28-2006, 07:58 AM
M$.

Who cares.

kaiser_pro
05-28-2006, 10:44 AM
if you can point me to a copy prectection system that actually works, and doesnt universally piss everyone off then you might have a case for it.

but seeing as they dont exsist, its not going to happen.

They made a claim that wma was superior to mp3 and ogg, but that wasnt the case, it'd be interesting to see for my self how good it was.

Its a shame becuase the people that make the Windows media codecs are really talented, its just the are lumbered with crappy DRM that sucks batteries, and my patience.

JeroenDStout
05-28-2006, 11:46 AM
On the topic of copy protection; I think that, as an artist, it's a pre you can make money by being inventive, something the copiers can't. So in that aspect, I'm not uneasy about people making false copies... they're being illigal to begin with, but further on, they can't make more work in my style. I'm much to the side that people earn money by making chairs, not by selling them. I'm not really a copyright person... theeeen again I'm not heavily having to make money still, so who knows, the money may strike and I may change my opinion.

And, yes, MS, thank you, the world needs another closed format. That's why I like iTunes to much, it has it's own format. I think this is why I respect Open-Source so much. They're more passionate about making software for 'the cause' and think it's a great idea to use open formats and don't go "hey we can get more money if we..."

Companies who's prime objective is to stay in business really are rubbish for the rest of the world, but we're so used to them we can hardly see what they do.

M$.

Who cares.
The people'll who'll tell me they can't see pictures on their sites using Firefox and therefore 'it must be rubbish, just like the rest of the OS-junk'.

GoranNF
05-28-2006, 12:11 PM
Well,that new image format seems pretty good for websites:it takes less space on your host and your website will load faster...

dan1el
05-28-2006, 08:02 PM
It's amazing that they even give it a try.
The media formats I can think that came out from MS is:
WMF: suppose to be replacing CGM, a meta format, combining bitmaps and vectors, failed miserably. It's the worstcrap I've seen in DTP, and Adobe supported it in PageMaker, wichthey have closed down for InDesign.
WMA and WMV: the only reason I use WMV is the size and my company doesn't "support" DivX and other non-MS formats nor Quicktime, wich I hate them for. THough it's good that we have MediaEncoder for free from MS (?!).
this format is probably going to be WMP, and as therest of you said, whyyy ??

Withtheargument of less power consumping, Idon't think thats an issue that MS should even think of, battery times and processorsare getting better almost day by day.

For the matter of alternatives for us (us being us working with graphics somehow) I think there are plenty of alternatives if we needed it. Jpeg2000 is supported by many softwares today, but not used same goes for SVG or PNG, all good formats but we stickwith the "classics", Jpeg, gif, Tiff, Cgm and so on.

I guess MS is trying to find somewhere to make money when Vista fials on them, sometimes in 2008.

Gentle Fury
05-28-2006, 08:49 PM
yah! Another programable format that will make it easier for kids with no lives and shadey businesses to install viruses and adware on our computers!! WOOHOO! I hate M$, and as far as right click disability.....ummmmm so what does that do, makes it so you have to view source and find the actual location of the file. You can disable right click with java....and even that is silly, if you right click disable with java all you have to do is drag the image to the address bar and it will pop up without the scripting, then save.....adding scripting to a file will NOT save it from being stolen, all it will do is make it easier to program malicious software into it and that seems to be what every M$ update is good for.....exploits!

sumpm1
05-29-2006, 06:15 AM
Half the file size? That is hardly worth a format change that will cause all types of incompatability, I hope this thing dies quickly. We already have wavelet and other formats that try to increase compression. There are tons of formats that compress much better than mp3, but mp3 is the most compatable.

almux
05-29-2006, 07:00 AM
Well,that new image format seems pretty good for websites:it takes less space on your host and your website will load faster...
...and will probably be just vista compatible so all the pc users will be forced to upgrade...
Does this seem cool?

CGTalk Moderation
05-29-2006, 07:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.