Status: Read
Received: from [207.176.88.85] by phillip.cerious.com (NTMail 3.03.0017/7.aaxh) with ESMTP id pcrews for <pcrews@cerious.com>; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:41:32 -0400
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA01361;
	Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:11:51 -0400
Received: by gate7.olympiakos.com (bulk_mailer v1.9); Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:10:21 -0400
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01273
	for tiff-outgoing; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:10:21 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: gate7.olympiakos.com: majordom set sender to owner-tiff@olympiakos.com using -f
Received: from as104.tel.hr (as104.tel.hr [205.219.255.36])
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA01270
	for <tiff@olympiakos.com>; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 09:10:18 -0400
Received: from infolink-software.com (ad10-m186.tel.hr [195.29.233.186])
	by as104.tel.hr (0.0.0/0.0.0) with ESMTP id PAA275716
	for <tiff@olympiakos.com>; Sat, 10 Jun 2000 15:10:16 +0200 (MEST)
Message-ID: <39423F5C.BE392BBA@infolink-software.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 15:15:09 +0200
From: Ivo_1 <ivo.penzar@infolink-software.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tiff@olympiakos.com
Subject: Add: Resized version
References: <394225EC.C17B933C@infolink-software.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com



I wrote:

> I recently ran across an MRI (Multi Resolution Image) TIFF file, created
> by "optirastoras: 1.6.0, 2" from "Optigraphics Corporation"...
>
> Observe that resized versions are missing PhotometricInterpretation and
> both TileWidth and TileLength tags. As the detailed analysis shows, they
> share these attributes from the IFD 0, so the "optirastoras 1.6.0, 2"
> probably thought it would not be necessary to repeat them for IFDs 1 to
> 5.

In fact, Compression tag is also missing for IFDs 1 to 5. libtiff concluded
uncompressed data (default), but "optirastoras" meant Fax4 - as specified
for the full size bitmap stored in IFD 0. That was actually the cause for
TIFFReadTile() to fail with IFD 5 (should have debugged it).

Anyway, I am still asking for your opinions about "industry standard" usage
and support for multiresolution TIFF images. E.g., which standard apps would
create them, do they allow for user to specify what resized bitmaps to
create, of which photometric type, etc. Also, do you know of multiple page
TIFF files containing resized versions for some/all of its pages. I.e., some
IFD tags would have bit 0 raised up, some bit 1 raised up, and some both
(?!) - not to mention their possible masks: NewSubfileType bit 2 raised up.
I am still not sure would that be compliant with TIFF rev. 5 (6), not to
mention which standard apps would support them. Specially I am not quite
sure which standard TIFF readers actually use those resize bitmaps to speed
up stretching and so. And for TIFF editors: would they then really update
both the original image and its resized version(s)?!

Ivo


