Text 20921, 43 rader
Skriven 2006-09-14 01:32:24 av James Bradley (1:134/77.0)
  Kommentar till text 20795 av Charles Angelich (1:123/140)
Ärende: Pixels.
===============
On or about: 09-10-06  01:45, Charles Angelich did engage Alan Zisman
regarding, but not limited to: Pixels.

 CA> 123ecb6a5041
 CA> win95

 CA> --8<--cut 
 
 JG>> Not if done digitally. You catch the digital output of one
 JG>> and simply write it to the other in whatever format.
 JG>> Unlike analog, where copying makes a difference, the only
 JG>> way for a digital image to degrade is to change the
 JG>> sampling rate. Since the next format is likely to be a
 JG>> higher sample rate, there will be no loss of data but the
 JG>> missing sampling will need to be added so it's no longer a
 JG>> perfect copy but shouldn't be missing anything from the
 JG>> original... 
 
 AZ> Although there are issues working with compressed formats
 AZ> like MP3 (or WMA) just as there are working with compressed
 AZ> graphic formats like JPG... in both cases, making editing
 AZ> changes then re-compressing will result in a sort of
 AZ> build-up of compression artifacts. 

 CA> Each format that is termed "lossy" means it drops portions of
 CA> the sound in order to achieve impressive compressed file sizes.
 CA> Each time the sound is re-compressed the software must choose
 CA> what to drop but there is _always_ some portion of the sound
 CA> being dropped. 
 
Golly... You guys are covering *all* the bases. The arguement, about a digital
transfer, without compression holds. File A, will be identical to file B,
provided the sampling rate, and bit depth are not changed. There needs to be no
resampling, D-A, A-D, just bit for bit.



... James

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20

--- Maximus 3.01
 * Origin: -=-= Calgary Organization CDN (403) 242-3221 (1:134/77)