Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Choosing Better-Quality JPEG Images With Software?

Posted by timothy on from the on-the-tip-of-my-script dept.

kpoole55 writes "I've been googling for an answer to a question and I'm not making much progress. The problem is image collections, and finding the better of near-duplicate images. There are many programs, free and costly, CLI or GUI oriented, for finding visually similar images — but I'm looking for a next step in the process. It's known that saving the same source image in JPEG format at different quality levels produces different images, the one at the lower quality having more JPEG artifacts. I've been trying to find a method to compare two visually similar JPEG images and select the one with the fewest JPEG artifacts (or the one with the most JPEG artifacts, either will serve.) I also suspect that this is going to be one of those 'Well, of course, how else would you do it? It's so simple.' moments."

2 of 291 comments (clear)

  1. Contrast by clem.dickey · · Score: 0, Redundant

    An image with more contrast (greater average difference between adjacent pixels) probably has more detail. But compressability, as has already been noted, is probably just as good a measure.

  2. Use judge by arose · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Judge. It's not perfect, but it works.

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.