Thread: LZW compression
View Single Post
Old 27th February 2016, 19:08   #7  |  Link
foxyshadis
ангел смерти
 
foxyshadis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
Posts: 9,558
It makes sense to use LZW, or your favorite lossless compression, which is why they all do. I've never seen a RAW that wasn't compressed, usually by huffman or ljpeg (which is just predictor + huffman, really), although I'm sure there are some older formats that don't. DNG can use deflate... and lossy jpeg, but that's just the exact same blocky 8-bit crap that a regular jpeg is.

A better question is whether it's worth using JPEG-XR, H.264, H.265/BPG, or some other high-bit still image format, whether lossless or lossy. Even lossless, the predictions, transforms, and use of CABAC makes for a significant gain over current RAW formats, but there's a potential for much more minimally lossy reduction while retaining deep-color fidelity. Right now it's mostly a matter of them not caring, since capacity keeps going up faster than they can make larger sensors.
foxyshadis is offline   Reply With Quote