Author Topic: More trouble with JPEG's  (Read 484 times)

dbl221

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 253
  • Kudos: 0
More trouble with JPEG's
« on: 30 August 2002, 00:44 »
The trouble with JPEG's

I have been involved in medical diagnostic imaging my entire adult life.  As a medical readiation technologist I can tell you that proprietary image types such as DICOM are seriosly hampering the availability of interoperability amongst vendors.  The JPEG group needs to open the standard to allow truely open stanards.  Nothing else will do.  DICOM  is a joke.  ARRRGHH!
dbl221***Comp-Sys walking wounded

voidmain

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,605
  • Kudos: 184
    • http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/
More trouble with JPEG's
« Reply #1 on: 30 August 2002, 02:15 »
The JPEG group thought that is what they were doing. They didn't forsee some company claiming patent infringement on certain compression technologies used in the standard, even if the claims are unfounded.
Someone please remove this account. Thanks...

beltorak0

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.angelfire.com/realm/beltorak
More trouble with JPEG's
« Reply #2 on: 30 August 2002, 07:07 »
unfortunatley the claims are not unfounded (even if they do get laughed out of court); the JPEG group (yeah yeah group group, whatever ever) wanted to use the floating point compression as the last stage, but since it was under copyright and royalties were charged for use, they settled on huffman / entropy encoding.  Floating point would have been much superior from what i've read.

-t.
from Attrition.Org
 
quote:
Like many times before, Microsoft is re-inventing the wheel and opting for something other than round.

-t.


voidmain

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,605
  • Kudos: 184
    • http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/
More trouble with JPEG's
« Reply #3 on: 30 August 2002, 07:29 »
It depends on who's side of the story you believe:
http://www.jpeg.org/newsrel1.html
Someone please remove this account. Thanks...

beltorak0

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.angelfire.com/realm/beltorak
More trouble with JPEG's
« Reply #4 on: 31 August 2002, 03:37 »
Im not familiar with the 'prior art' thing.  how will that stop the collection of royalties?

-t.
from Attrition.Org
 
quote:
Like many times before, Microsoft is re-inventing the wheel and opting for something other than round.

-t.


DC

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Kudos: 0
More trouble with JPEG's
« Reply #5 on: 31 August 2002, 20:06 »
If there is prior art, the patent is not valid, hence no royalties can be demanded for the now-no-longer-patented procedure.
GS/CS d- s-: a--- C++ UL+ P+ L++>+++ E W++ N>+ o K- w-- O- M V? PS+>++ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5+ X R tv+ b+++ DI+ D+ G++ e>++++ h! r- y
A quantummechanical wavefunction describing an unknown amount of bottles of beer on the wall
A quantummechanical wavefunction describing an unknown amount of bottles of beer on the wall
We take a measurement, the wavefunction will collapse, and one of the bottles of beer will fall

beltorak0

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 223
  • Kudos: 0
    • http://www.angelfire.com/realm/beltorak
More trouble with JPEG's
« Reply #6 on: 1 September 2002, 10:23 »
so what constitutes prior art?  what are the requirements?

-t?
from Attrition.Org
 
quote:
Like many times before, Microsoft is re-inventing the wheel and opting for something other than round.

-t.