Re: [dev] Re: [farbfeld] announce

From: David Phillips <>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:47:03 +1300

I tried compressing with bzip2 and xz, (both set to maximum
compression with -9). I know xz to be slower, but I have measured it
to have the least bloat when fed random data to compress.

With "clean" low-noise images, it would seem that bzip2 is
out-performing xz markedly, hence your recommendation. Also, both
ff+xz and ff+bzip2 out-perform PNG. However, on noisier images, such
as those from a camera, it would seem that although PNG outperforms
farbfeld wrapped with either compression algorithm, xz is now
out-performing bzip2, although less markedly than when the reverse is
true on cleaner images.

I intend to do some more widespread testing on a large sample of
different images which I can share the results on. But I can confirm
that as it stands bzip2 looks likely to be the best candidate.

Received on Wed Nov 18 2015 - 01:47:03 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Nov 18 2015 - 01:48:09 CET