~terry
Thu, Jul 25, 1996 (18:10)
seed
Lightning Strike Plug-in for Netscape 2.0 -- Lightning Strike is a
wavelet graphic codec designed to dramatically reduce the file size
of an image while still retaining a high degree of quality. In terms of
reducing image file sizes, Lightning Strikes does indeed succeed.
GIF images, for example, can benefit from a compression ratio of
up to 170:1 -- a 235 Kb graphic can be compressed down to 6 Kb
with Lightning Strike. These images can also be viewed inline
(complete with right mouse button functionality and associated
image data) with the Netscape 2.0 plug-in. Unfortunately, retaining
graphic integrity is another story entirely. While JPEG images
compressed at the same rate as Lightning Strike are worse in terms
of quality than a comparable Lightning Strike image, both types
pale in comparison to a GIF or similar type graphic. The Plug-in
only decompresses images; if you're interested in compressing your
images, you'll need to purchase the $99.95 commercial package.
With the dominance of GIF and JPEG graphic file types, the
difficulty in getting implemented into most web browsers, and the
relatively poor image quality of Lightning Strike, this codec may
have already been rendered obsolete by existing standards and
conditions.
Pros: The only app available for viewing Lightning Strike
compressed graphics
Cons: Limited to viewing Lightning Strike images only, poor image
quality
New: Progressive decompression, save option, improved
installation, bug fixes, more
Version Reviewed: 1.7
Date of Review: 5/7/96 Reviewer: Forrest Stroud
~fhausman
Mon, Jan 27, 1997 (08:41)
#1
Infinop's Lightning Strike 2.5/2.6 images at all compression ratios are superior to JPEG images. A prior review (unfairly) barely mentioned LS advantages over JPEG. In informal tests compressing BMPs to GIFs, JPEGs, and Lightning Strike files and evaluating the results with a jury of visual artists:
1. At compression ratios chosen to maintain image quality, LS images are indistinguishable from GIF-encoded images. The resultant LS files are much smaller than their JPEG counterparts, and vastly smaller than their GIF counterparts.
2. At compression ratios chosen to match a JPEG file's size, the LS image quality is much higher than JPEG - detail is better, and color blotching is gone.
3. At compression ratios chosen to match a JPEG image's quality, the LS files are 3 to 8 times smaller than JPEG files.
Due to reduced disk usage, shorter network transfer times, and increased available compute power, JPEG-compressed images replace non-animated GIFs on web sites worldwide; for the same reasons, wavelet-compressed images will replace JPEGs. I'm not associated with Infinop.
Rating: ****
Pros: Smaller files and better image quality than JPEG. Small footprint.
Cons: needs fast CPU for good performance. Compression s/w price high for casual web development.
~terry
Mon, Jan 27, 1997 (08:48)
#2
Can you point us to any example web sites that are using these types of
files? I assume they have Netscape and Explorer browser support?