On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 23:03:10 +1200, Nick FitzGerald said: > And, your suggestion does not say what to do with "bad" JPEGs -- it > seems you assume the JPG to PNG convertor will necessarily and > "correctly" deal with such invalid input. Do we really know that is a > valid assumption? There's also another sticky issue - it seems at least one release of AOL's "net accelerator" basically consisted of code that downgraded all the .JPG to a higher-compression (therefore more lossy) format. Some questioned what this meant for places like corbis.com, who make money selling *high* quality images. Applying type conversions like this is always fraught with unintended consequences... :) Bonus points for figuring out how to make the filtering work if the front-end points at an https: :)
Attachment:
pgp00042.pgp
Description: PGP signature