? Two Different Memory Sizes Listed for a File

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nehmo
  • Start date Start date
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage All Things Mopar said:
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Arno Wagner
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...
Why is it nonsense to say a JPEG must be decompressed to load
into RAM, or more correctly, into the unformatted bitmap of any
graphics app?

Because it is untrue. A jpeg is loaded but-identical into RAM, just
as any other file. That you can decompress it afterwards has
relevance. That some software may automatically decomress it
is also irrelevant.

Arno
 
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage J. Clarke said:
Arno Wagner wrote:
This is all well and good but it does not explain the observed behavior.

You are correct. For some reason I did not have the posting at the
start of the thread. It seems that Correl draw does indeed
display something like "memory needed to deal with this file".

Arno
 
Nehmo said:
When you look at the properties of a file in Windows XP Explorer, it
lists two sizes: Size, and Size on disk. The Size on disk is larger by
a fraction. What's the explanation of this?

In Corel Paint Shop Pro X, when I look at image information, there's
two sizes there too. I see On disk, and In RAM. The In RAM amount is
ten times larger than the On disk

Just a memory hog, that's why it's slow, too.

Uni

amount for one jpeg. What's the
 
Arno Wagner said:
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage All Things Mopar
Because it is untrue.

Not necessarily.
A jpeg is loaded but-identical into RAM, just as any other file.

Not necessarily with image manipulation software,
where he is seeing the size in ram reported. THOSE
usually do convert it into an uncompressed bit map.
That you can decompress it afterwards has relevance. That
some software may automatically decomress it is also irrelevant.

No it isnt when its that thats reporting the bigger size.
 
Today, with great enthusiasm and quite emphatically, Arno Wagner
laid this on an unsuspecting readership ...
Because it is untrue. A jpeg is loaded but-identical into RAM,
just as any other file. That you can decompress it afterwards
has relevance. That some software may automatically decomress
it is also irrelevant.
total nonsense! the pixels have been compressed! get a decent hex
editor and look at a JPEG and also a simple Windoze BMP. All the
BMP has it it besides the triplet bytes for each pixel is a very
small header.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

"You're gonna get your mind right" - The Cap'n to Lucas Jackson
in "Cool Hand Luke"

"This is the way he wants it … well, he gets it" - The Cap'n to
Lucas Jackson in "Cool Hand Luke"

"What we got here is failure to communicate" - The Cap'n to Lucas
 
Arno Wagner said:
You are correct.
For some reason I did not have the posting at the start of the thread.

Wota lame excuse, babblehead. As usual you were completely intoxica-
ted and were sniping before you were done reading the whole message.
Every aspect of the OP is there in the quoting for everyone to see.
That and that you responded to an answer to the second question with
a response to the first.
It seems that Correl draw does indeed display something like "memory
needed to deal with this file".

As do most decent picture viewers when showing properties.
 
345 said:
Not necessarily.
Nonsense.


Not necessarily

Oh bullshit, Roddy.
with image manipulation software, where he is seeing the size in ram
reported.

Decompression takes place in RAM so it has to arrive there
first, and obviously that is 'as is', in it's compressed form.
THOSE usually do convert it into an uncompressed bit map.

After it's been loaded into RAM, not when.
No it isnt when its that thats reporting the bigger size.

Which may well use a formula without decompressing it in reality.
 
Back
Top