unforum

dmax

SPEC: Lake of Tears

**Posted:** Mon Mar 17, 2003 12:54 pm

_________________
That sounds like something HITLER would say!

lews · Greenhorn Joined: 17 Mar 2003 Posts: 5 Location: NJ

Devils

**Posted:** Mon Mar 17, 2003 1:12 pm

luxandpoe · Guest

Hole?

**Posted:** Mon Mar 17, 2003 1:36 pm

tartanwolf

Question re: b/w photo

**Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2003 3:10 pm

MaggieMae · Boot Joined: 02 Jan 2003 Posts: 41

Re: Question re: b/w photo

**Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2003 11:14 pm

konamouse

**Posted:** Tue Mar 25, 2003 11:52 pm

_________________
'squeek'
r u a Sammeeeee? I am Forever!

tartanwolf

Lake of Tears Photos

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:52 am

dmax

photos

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:42 am

_________________
That sounds like something HITLER would say!

RPGgame · Unfettered Joined: 02 Jan 2003 Posts: 501

yes here would be nice

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:47 am

tartanwolf

OK Here goes-Lake of Tears Photos

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 3:18 am

vpisteve

For what it's worth, these pics are definitely different.

Load them into two browsers and toggle back and forth. If you do that, it's easy to see. There is a shadowy figure on the right side of the bridge in one of the pictures. Plus, note the different file sizes.

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 3:47 am

lanzz · Boot Joined: 18 Mar 2003 Posts: 25

Re: OK Here goes-Lake of Tears Photos

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 4:58 am

Guest · Guest

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 9:52 am

konamouse

Ah, wasn't kicking you. I seems I must have dl the picture in March, and not the initial picture that was on the page on opening night (Feb).

So give me a trout point.

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 10:38 am

_________________
'squeek'
r u a Sammeeeee? I am Forever!

lanzz · Boot Joined: 18 Mar 2003 Posts: 25

it seems there is no cause for the bigger size other than the different software used to produce it and possibly lower level of compression. meta-data differences:

the old image has transparency channel, the new doesn't (it seems to be completely opaque in the old though);
the new image uses much more colors: 520 for the old, 1226 for the new (can be attributed to the addition of the ghost image);
old image is 28x28 pixels per centimeter, the new is 27.95x27.95 (could be caused by the editing program);
the new image is marked as being produced with macromedia fireworks 4.0, the old is not marked;
the old image has gamma and chromaticity information and rendering-intent ("saturation") specified, the new doesn't.

another interesting thing is, that the difference between the two images has quite a lot of noise over the whole image - if the only difference was the ghost figure, the rest of the difference should be completely black. the images are png which uses lossless compression (zip in this case), so these cannot be compression artifacts, though the noise is stronger on 8-pixel boundaries, forming a grid over the image.

**Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:00 am