{"id":12302,"date":"2007-04-02T16:33:50","date_gmt":"2007-04-02T16:33:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.adobe.com\/jnackdev\/2007\/04\/jpeg-2000-do-you-use-it.html"},"modified":"2007-04-02T16:33:50","modified_gmt":"2007-04-02T16:33:50","slug":"jpeg_2000_do_you_use_it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/2007\/04\/02\/jpeg_2000_do_you_use_it\/","title":{"rendered":"JPEG 2000 &#8211; Do you use it?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As you may or&#8211;as seems overwhelmingly likely&#8211;may <em>not<\/em> know, Photoshop ships with a plug-in for reading and writing <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Jpeg2000\">JPEG 2000-format<\/a> files.&#160; Compared with the regular JPEG format (technically known as <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Jfif\">JFIF<\/a>), JPEG 2000 offers advantages such as support for higher bit depths, more advanced compression, and a lossless compression option.&#160; Adobe developed the plug-in in anticipation of cameras entering the market with native JPEG 2000 support on board. <\/p>\n<p>The thing is, that hasn&#8217;t happened, nor have we seen other widespread adoption of the format    in places we know Photoshop is being used.&#160; Therefore with Photoshop CS2 we made the call to stop installing the plug-in by default, but to continue making it available via the product CD.&#160; What&#8217;s probably not obvious is that existing features keep consuming resources to maintain &amp; test, even if no features are added to them.&#160; As we plan for the future, we need to retire features that no longer make sense &amp; focus instead on capabilities that matter.<\/p>\n<p>So, do you use JPEG 2000?&#160; If so, please give a shout and let us know how &amp; why you use it.<\/p>\n<p><em>PS&#8211;Note that support for JPEG 2000 as a <u>file format by itself<\/u> &amp; support for the <u>compression options<\/u> it offers are two separate things.&#160;PDF supports JPEG 2000-compressed images, so we wouldn&#8217;t remove that support.&#160; I&#8217;m just trying to gauge the value of supporting standalone JPEG 2000 reading and writing. <\/em>\n<\/p>\n<p><b>[Update: We&#8217;re not planning to change Photoshop&#8217;s JPEG 2000 support strategy anytime soon.  Thanks for all the feedback.  We&#8217;ve got what we need, so I&#8217;m switching off comments.  &#8211;J.]<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>As you may or&#8211;as seems overwhelmingly likely&#8211;may not know, Photoshop ships with a plug-in for reading and writing JPEG 2000-format files.&#160; Compared with the regular JPEG format (technically known as JFIF), JPEG 2000 offers advantages such as support for higher bit depths, more advanced compression, and a lossless compression option.&#160; Adobe developed the plug-in in [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12302"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12302"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12302\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/jnack.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}