Received: from mailgate007.isp.belgacom.be (mailgate007.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.5.213])
	by maildelivery001.isp.belgacom.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 782045A800E
	for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Wed,  4 Jul 2007 19:24:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from r153.dmsolutions.ca (HELO duke.maptools.org) ([209.217.116.153])
  by in.mx.skynet.be with ESMTP; 04 Jul 2007 19:24:22 +0200
Received: from duke.maptools.org (duke.maptools.org [127.0.0.1])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l64HDoWX022441;
	Wed, 4 Jul 2007 13:14:03 -0400
Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.173])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l64HDl12022438
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 13:13:48 -0400
Received: from mac.com (smtpin08-en2 [10.13.10.153])
	by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/smtpout03/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id
	l64HDkQB024243
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:13:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.8] (c-24-18-225-212.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [24.18.225.212])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin08/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id l64HDiJa015825
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:13:45 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p0624081dc2b17e475b6a@[10.0.1.8]>
In-Reply-To: <0DD3B73D-E4F3-4916-9BB5-8763388A0913@owl.phy.queensu.ca>
References: <200707031603.l63G3SED026351@duke.maptools.org>
	<9A01C3DF-894D-41BE-8266-D3F920A1FD92@owl.phy.queensu.ca>
	<p06240819c2b04cdac5c6@[10.0.1.8]>
	<4FC2B10C-9860-472A-BEFF-890CDAF05DDC@owl.phy.queensu.ca>
	<Pine.SOC.4.60.0707041013280.922@blade.simplesystems.org>
	<0DD3B73D-E4F3-4916-9BB5-8763388A0913@owl.phy.queensu.ca>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:13:40 -0700
To: tiff@lists.maptools.org
From: Stephen Carlsen <sc42business@mac.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-Brightmail-scanned: yes
Subject: [Tiff] 16-Bit-Per-Channel Lossless Compression
X-BeenThere: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion <tiff.lists.maptools.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/private/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@lists.maptools.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
X-UIDL: 000000000023ceae.00002522
X-MSP-STORE: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:24:23 +0200
Status:   

It seems to me that none of the lossless compression schemes commonly 
used in TIFF are very effective at compressing 16 bit or 32 bit data. 
And, with technologies such as Camera Raw gaining in popularity 
rapidly, there's a lot more 16 bit data out there.

If we can come up with a simple approach that gives us on the order 
of 2:1 compression of 16 bit photographs, is this useful, or are 
storage space and bandwidth now so inexpensive that we don't care any 
more?
_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: Tiff@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
