Return-Path: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com
Return-Path: <owner-tiff@olympiakos.com>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by at1895.spb.edu (8.12.0.Beta7/8.12.0.Beta7) with ESMTP id f3R9lCqn027948
	for <dron@localhost>; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:47:50 +0400
Received: from eudoramail.com [209.185.123.45]
	by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.8.1)
	for dron@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:47:50 +0400 (MSD)
Received: from gate7.olympiakos.com ([207.176.88.85]) by shared1-mail.whowhere.com; Thu Apr 26 09:30:47 2001
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA16519;
	Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:10:03 -0400
Received: by gate7.olympiakos.com (bulk_mailer v1.9); Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:07:01 -0400
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA16343
	for tiff-outgoing; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:07:00 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: gate7.olympiakos.com: majordom set sender to owner-tiff@olympiakos.com using -f
Received: from atlex01.erdas.com (smtp.erdas.com [199.74.193.210])
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA16340
	for <tiff@olympiakos.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:06:58 -0400
Received: by atlex01.erdas.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
	id <J1QH27JW>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:13:48 -0400
Message-ID: <900805FA5A6FD31180BA009027786C2FD6C5ED@atlex01.erdas.com>
From: Max Martinez <max.martinez@erdas.com>
To: "'Michael O'Rourke'" <morourke@Adobe.COM>, tiff@olympiakos.com
Subject: RE: 8K chunks for RowsPerStrip?
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:13:47 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1792
Lines: 45

That's funny, because the ONLY single strip images I have ever seen are
1-bit, where it is very common to only have 1-strip.

Perhaps there needs to be an inflationary provision in the recommended
maximum strip/tile size but to abandon it is to partially abandon
the promise of interoperability attempting to be delivered through
the TIFF format.

A single strip of a full Landsat TM Scene (~350 MB) is absurd even today.
As far as I know, despite the increase in RAM and disk space for swap,
no one has yet upped the present 2GB virtual address space limit imposed
in most operating environments. Thus, one might conclude that the 8K
recommendation should stay right where it is because, in the old space/time
battle, disk access times and cpu times have gotten faster while
virtual address space has remained constant. You are incurring less of
a penalty in terms of time to access multiple strips than you were when
they wrote the spec, but the relative space cost for having strips from
multiple files reside simultaneously somewhere in the virtual address
space of a process has remained the same.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael O'Rourke [mailto:morourke@Adobe.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:40 AM
> To: tiff@olympiakos.com
> Subject: 8K chunks for RowsPerStrip?
> 
> 
> 
> Does this standard still apply? I end up seeing _lots_ of 
> TIFF files that
> write out one strip. Seems like this standard/suggestion (per 
> Section 7 of
> the spec) was probably meant more for days when machines 
> didn't have much
> ram and swap space.
> 
> I've also noticed that most apps I can find have no trouble 
> reading one
> strip images and one strip images, of course, have better compression.
> Sometimes _significantly_ better compression.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael
> 

