leonardr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (2003-08-21 at 1016.13 -0400): > At 11:42 PM -0700 8/13/03, Manish Singh wrote: > >Supports IEEE floats, but not float16 (a 32-bit float cut in half). R&H > >added this to filmgimp since they had established this format in their > >workflow with other tools already. > Why would you only use half of a 32bit float?? That reduces > your accuracy/precision and makes you incompatible with the rest of > the world doing floating point imaging. It is a trade off, ints vs floats. Better ranges than ints (in a rough sense) with less bandwith than floats. Currently supporting float is is the contrary of incompatible: it is a format for video cards (that explains why it was created and the tradeoff). People working in games want it, people working in using hw to render 3d anims want it to. > >GEGL uses XYZ as a native format. > Why? Lab is a richer model esp. for handling chromanicity > and is also a standard in the print world natively. Why limit to > XYZ?? Does using XYZ imply that LAB is not supported? > >It's not just the tags, but extending value ranges for tags (needed for > >the two cases above). And a lag time means either waiting for an updated > >spec, which is a holdup, or going ahead and running the risk it not being > >granted because someone else tried to get their conflicting values in first. > The spec is only updated every 18-24 months when Adobe > releases a new version of Photoshop - so you definitely don't wait > for that! As for the other, yes, that is true you could wait, but > nobody does... Where are those updates? Is it some kind of errata or addon? The PDF I have says 1992 (TIFF v6.0). > Never implemented a file format, have you ;). > Reading/Writing the 'ar' archive, and reading/writing the XML > is the easy part - because you can leverage existing libraries to [...] > Worth the work, sure! Trivial - no way! That is the reason other ideas are being examined. GSR
