HIMAT and the other AFTI Projects

My dear PaulMM,

are thoese three pictures good or not ?,if not, I will delete them.

General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon (Aero Series 26) Second Edition
 

Attachments

  • 6.png
    6.png
    958.8 KB · Views: 66
  • 7.png
    7.png
    1.2 MB · Views: 45
  • 8.png
    8.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 62
Lets examine the evidence. First image is a crappy copy of this image already posted in high resolution by RAP earlier in the topic.


 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
Saving them as PNG also makes them huge compared to JPG. PNG is good for line art and text but not photos.
Click to expand...
That's not how you should determine which format to use.
GIF, PNG are lossless format with optional different compressions methodes and other tricks to reduce size. You want to use them to preserve the original data.
JPEG/JPG is a lossy format. It blurs the images to expand the color space in order to use discret math wave function to compress them. You use this if you don't care about preserving the original or the quality. This is why you get artifacts and tiling. Compression works best with blury/natural photos than a drawing.
WEBP can be either lossless or lossy. Downside it doesn't store the % compression or lossyness and if corrupt it's a complete loss.
 
For posting on the internet, you should post photos as JPG or WEBP in high res. Given a 5MB size limit, this will be infinitely higher quality than a 5MB lossless PNG. GIF can only store 256 colours, so pretty useless for colour photos. These images are crap anyway, hardly going to get worse with JPG.

For storing for archival purposes, and for printing books, sure, use lossless PNG or better yet TIF (standard in the publishing world).
 
Last edited:
Third picture, of an F-16 AFTI artist's impression, I don't think has been posted here before, so its the only one possibly interesting. We have plenty of photos of the actual aircraft, and the quality of the scan is so low it isn't showing much. However, someone else could use the reference to make a better scan. Of three pics, this one is probably worth posting with the reference.

What do you think @hesham ? Do you agree or disagree with my reasoning.
 
Last edited:
OK my dear Paul,I agree with your opinion,but excuse me,that's only a PDF
file,so I can't make a better pictures.
 
Yes, I understand that, but sometimes the quality is too poor for the pictures to be worth posting.. However I have the actual book myself, so its sometimes interesting to know references because someone with the actual book might make a better scan.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom