xinxinlx / openjpeg

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/openjpeg
Other
0 stars 0 forks source link

limited tif support #322

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

TIF support is currently provided by libtiff but this has some limitations, in 
particular when dealing with non-8 or non-16 bits j2k images.

For instance, file6.jp2 from conformance test set is 12 bits per component, but 
OpenJPEG produces a decoded tif file with 16 bits per component. This is wrong 
: the tiff file should be 12 bits too.

TIF support should be improved/extended to support this kind of cases.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by antonin on 31 Mar 2014 at 1:05

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
To rephrase the comment, openjpeg/tiff support is limited. libtiff does handle 
12bits quite nicely.

Original comment by mathieu.malaterre on 1 Apr 2014 at 8:27

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Well, it's not what I have been told but that would be a rather good news, 
meaning that we do not have to implement inhouse tiff support.

Do you have any idea of the workload to modify imagetotif() function so as to 
correctly use the TIF library and output 12-bits image when it's needed ?

Original comment by antonin on 1 Apr 2014 at 2:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Well, it's not what I have been told but that would be a rather good news, 
meaning that we do not have to implement inhouse tiff support.

Do you have any idea of the workload to modify imagetotif() function so as to 
correctly use the TIF library and output 12-bits image when it's needed ?

Original comment by antonin on 1 Apr 2014 at 2:45

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by antonin on 1 Apr 2014 at 2:45

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
@antonin,

I tested what I found in 
https://code.google.com/p/openjpeg/source/browse/tags/version.1.4/codec/convert.
c & it seemed to work.

However, 12bits TIFF handling disappeared in r745

This is somewhat related to issue 264.
I guess it would be good to get a status on this one before doing any work here.

Original comment by m.darb...@gmail.com on 31 Oct 2014 at 11:24