What about COG (Cloud Optimized GeoTIFF - https://www.cogeo.org/)? No file size limit (using BigTIFF), different encodings (LZW, deflate, JPEG, zstd, ...), direct access to any part of the image, overviews/pyramids for different levels of detail, well known format (TIFF). .___ ._ ..._ .. . ._. .___ .. __ . _. . __.. ... .... ._ .__ Entre dos pensamientos racionales hay infinitos pensamientos irracionales.
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 at 19:59, Aaron Boxer <boxe...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:12 PM Marty J. Sullivan < > marty.sulli...@cornell.edu> wrote: > >> Just my two cents, I have very little personal use of JP2 although I’ve >> experimented with it in the past. >> >> >> >> I personally have switched to using WEBP and have not run into any issues >> (other than wide support). I think the one place JP2 beats WEBP is that JP2 >> supports virtually unlimited image dimensions whereas WEBP is limited to >> 16383 x 16383. Then again, with GeoTIFF tiling, this is pretty much a >> non-issue. >> > > 16383 x 16383 sounds a bit limited. Even if you use tiling, if your > compression is lossy then you will see artifacts at the tile boundaries. > > >> >> >> AVIF is also up and coming and superior to WEBP, so I’d imagine we’ll see >> support for that someday in GDAL as well. It supports larger image >> dimensions than WEBP (65536x65536) >> >> >> >> With that in mind, I personally would never choose to use JP2 at this >> point, but maybe there are other use-cases I’m unaware of. >> > > The problem with larger dimensions in WebP is the impossibility of > decoding a sub window in the image. You are forced to do > a complete decode each time you view it. > > > >> >> >> Marty >> >> >> >> *From: *gdal-dev <gdal-dev-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Aaron >> Boxer <boxe...@gmail.com> >> *Date: *Monday, March 29, 2021 at 10:22 AM >> *To: *gdal dev <gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org> >> *Subject: *[gdal-dev] Long Term Prognosis for JPEG 2000 >> >> >> >> Hello There, >> >> I'm curious what folks here think about the future of JPEG 2000 in >> geospatial? >> >> I was having a little discussion about this over here: >> >> https://github.com/USGS-Astrogeology/ISIS3/issues/4237 >> >> >> >> To me, the features that made JP2 unique amongst the many codecs were: >> >> >> >> 0. royalty free >> >> 1. support for lossy and lossless compression in a single framework >> >> 2. support for TB images >> >> 3. fast on-the-fly random access into large images >> >> 4. decoder can determine what sort of progression it uses at decode time: >> resolution, >> >> quality, component or spatial. >> >> 5. precise rate control >> >> 6. error and re-compression resilience >> >> 7. JPIP protocol for progressive transmission over low-bandwidth networks >> >> >> >> The cons to JP2 were: >> >> >> >> 0. computational complexity i.e. dog slow >> >> 1. (until recently) buggy and slow OSS implementations >> >> 2. patent questions (largely resolved) >> >> 3. poor support from HW and browsers >> >> >> >> Do you think there is currently a viable alternative which covers enough >> of the advantages while lacking enough of the negatives that plague JP2 ? >> I'm curious because I have been devoting quite a bit of time to addressing >> some of those negatives, as discussed at length previously, >> >> The standard remains essential in digital cinema, medical imaging and in >> the archive community. But, those last two fields may also be ripe for >> change. >> >> >> >> In digital cinema, precise rate control is a must, so I think it is here >> to stay in the area. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Aaron >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
