Re: Wavelet-compressed HRV data


a_van_belle
 

--- In MSG-1@..., "David Taylor" <david-taylor@b...>
wrote:
That's a good point, Ian. I have increased the default JPEG save
level from 82 to 86, but I believe that Arne van Belle wants to
update some tests on the save level setting. It will be
interesting to see his new results.

Hello David and others,

Did some tests, comparing the 28 October IIPS lossy HRV to 30
October's IMPF losless HRV. This showed a drastic improvement on
details and gave smooth grey gradients. All "jpeg artefacts" are gone
when saving losless HRV to PNG.
But we don't know if these lossless wavelet compressed HRV's are here
to stay. (I really hope so !)

So I should do a new comparison on lossy compressed HRV's from IMPF
(29 Oct) saved in jpg86 and png.

Currently I am determining new min/max values on MSG-1 and GOES
images using the 10 bit Rob Alblas XRIT2PIC decoder, will let all
know my results later this week.
First observation: The IMPF system does use the 0..1023 range much
better compared to the IIPS.

Greetings,
Arne van Belle

Join MSG-1@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.