Name: Cudder !cXCudderUE 2016-05-14 17:53
What makes VN companies come up with proprietary image/video/audio formats that compress worse than standard ones? Here's an example:
Proprietary format, original: 871KB
Proprietary format, recompressed[1]: 822KB
PNG: 676KB
Optimised PNG: 674KB
JPG (high): 221KB
JPG (medium): 125KB
JPG (low, artifacts start becoming obvious): 86.7KB
So they could be several times smaller while looking almost the same, and that's not even getting into things like difference encoding since the bulk of them are almost the same images with slight differences.
Here's the challenge: find an existing VN, and write a little utility to compress it to 1/2th its original size or less while maintaining all the content. You have until the end of the year.
[1] I RE'd the format and wrote a compressor for it, which performed better than the original while decompressing to the exact same data.
Proprietary format, original: 871KB
Proprietary format, recompressed[1]: 822KB
PNG: 676KB
Optimised PNG: 674KB
JPG (high): 221KB
JPG (medium): 125KB
JPG (low, artifacts start becoming obvious): 86.7KB
So they could be several times smaller while looking almost the same, and that's not even getting into things like difference encoding since the bulk of them are almost the same images with slight differences.
Here's the challenge: find an existing VN, and write a little utility to compress it to 1/2th its original size or less while maintaining all the content. You have until the end of the year.
[1] I RE'd the format and wrote a compressor for it, which performed better than the original while decompressing to the exact same data.