Why JPEGs for input?

[daveloyall]

Hi, shouldn't you use RAW format images for input instead of JPEG compressed files?

[catid]

It supports PNM, PNG, and some other formats in addition to JPEG by using STB. That sounds really useful but I do not have time to add more input format options

…

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 8:04 AM Dave Loyall ***@***.***> wrote: Hi, shouldn't you use RAW format images for input instead of JPEG compressed files? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPZIXQ1OGEobohVntjUWBE0Nnnhf7uTks5twGKCgaJpZM4T1IQz> .

[catid]

It supports PNM, PNG, and some other formats in addition to JPEG by using STB. That sounds really useful but I do not have time to add more input format options

…

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 8:04 AM Dave Loyall ***@***.***> wrote: Hi, shouldn't you use RAW format images for input instead of JPEG compressed files? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPZIXQ1OGEobohVntjUWBE0Nnnhf7uTks5twGKCgaJpZM4T1IQz> .

[daveloyall]

Ah, I'm sorry. I meant to ask if it is intentional that the README shows test results for compressing JPEGs, rather than raw files. My understanding is that the raster of pixels you get out of a JPEG decoder will always have some certain characteristics which will make it inherently compressible--you know, those blocks of pixels that are smooth gradients rather than the "random" bag of values you'd observe in a RAW file. I think compression performance statistics on RAW files would tell us more.

[daveloyall]

Ah, I'm sorry. I meant to ask if it is intentional that the README shows test results for compressing JPEGs, rather than raw files. My understanding is that the raster of pixels you get out of a JPEG decoder will always have some certain characteristics which will make it inherently compressible--you know, those blocks of pixels that are smooth gradients rather than the "random" bag of values you'd observe in a RAW file. I think compression performance statistics on RAW files would tell us more.