jpeg2000 status and optimization

Questions and postings pertaining to the development of ImageMagick, feature enhancements, and ImageMagick internals. ImageMagick source code and algorithms are discussed here. Usage questions which are too arcane for the normal user list should also be posted here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Marsu42
Posts: 75
Joined: 2014-06-12T03:17:45-07:00
Authentication code: 6789
Location: Berlin

jpeg2000 status and optimization

Post by Marsu42 » 2016-09-10T07:15:24-07:00

I thought the jpeg2000 standard is dead for practical use with joe sixpack as no web browsers or many meaningful viewers can handle it. That is until I discovered that pdf supports it, i.e. for a batch of pictures I now put them inside a pdf as jp2. For my photography, this results in a noticeable compression/size advantage vs basic jpeg and I prefer mailing a (secured) single pdf rather than multiple image attachments.

With this new interest, I wonder if there's a way to optimize jpeg2000 compression inside im or probably with other available tools (after lossless im output)? The older jpeg is so advanced now, that the jpeg2000 options seem very basic, other than making sure the tile size is large enough.

It seems there were some ideas back then, but I dunno if they were forgotten or implemented somewhere: http://www.dmi.unict.it/~battiato/downl ... eg2000.pdf

User avatar
fmw42
Posts: 25408
Joined: 2007-07-02T17:14:51-07:00
Authentication code: 1152
Location: Sunnyvale, California, USA

Re: jpeg2000 status and optimization

Post by fmw42 » 2016-09-10T10:53:59-07:00


User avatar
Marsu42
Posts: 75
Joined: 2014-06-12T03:17:45-07:00
Authentication code: 6789
Location: Berlin

Re: jpeg2000 status and optimization

Post by Marsu42 » 2016-09-10T14:01:42-07:00

Indeed, that's what google imagemagick jp2 turns up, and the options are so basic I neglected to quote the link :-p ... thus the question if anyone knows if a smarter compression is implemented anywhere, see my link to the research pdf above.

Post Reply