SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the reduce-the-size-of-your-pron-storage dept.
With unlimited data plans becoming increasingly expensive, or subscribers being forced to ditch their unlimited data due to overuse, anything that can reduce the amount of data we download is welcome. This is especially true for media including images or video, and Google just delivered a major gain when it comes to viewing images online.
The clever scientists at Google Research have come up with a new technique for keeping image size to an absolute minimum without sacrificing quality. So good is this new technique that it promises to reduce the size of an image on disk by as much as 75 percent.
The new technique is called RAISR, which stands for "Rapid and Accurate Image Super-Resolution." Typically, reducing the size of an image means lowering its quality or resolution. RAISR works by taking a low-resolution image and upsampling it, which basically means enhancing the detail using filtering. Anyone who's ever tried to do this manually knows that the end result looks a little blurred. RAISR avoids that thanks to machine learning.
[...] RAISR has been trained using low and high quality versions of images. Machine learning allows the system to figure out the best filters to recreate the high quality image using only the low quality version. What you end up with after lots of training is a system that can do the same high quality upsampling on most images without needing the high quality version for reference.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 1) by j-beda on Thursday January 19 2017, @10:23PM
Is the new image 75% (3/4) the size of the old? Is the old image 125% (5/4) the size of the old - thus the new being 80% the size of the old? Is the new image 25% (1/4) the size of the old?
Is it something else?
Why do so many people want to sue the word "smaller" when combined with a percentage or fraction? Do they not know how ambigious that is?
(Score: 2) by jelizondo on Thursday January 19 2017, @11:03PM
They want to sue the word because America is lawyer happy and they don't know how to use the word smaller. Talk about ambiguity!
(Score: 2) by Bill Dimm on Thursday January 19 2017, @11:45PM
I haven't read the article, but assuming they are using terminology in the standard way it means:
new_size = old_size - 0.75 * old_size = 25% of old_size
It's really not ambiguous. Where things do get ambiguous is when the old and new quantities are themselves percentages. If someone says "Previously precision was 70% and adjustments improved it by 10%" does that mean it is now 77% or is it 80% (i.e., is the 10% change relative or absolute)?