posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 07:55 AM
Originally posted by arianna
If you can show me where the artifacts are in the right-hand image I am more than willing to entertain your reply. If you cannot show me the artifacts
in the right-hand image then there is no need for the discussion to continue on the subject.
If you can not see the compression artifacts your self, then I guess this proves you don't know anything about compression artifacts...
I highlighted the compression artifacts in your .JPG in red. The red lines follow the "quilting" or "checkerboarding" artifacts that are the result
of block-based quantization.
If a source image has these compression artifacts, there is no way to remove the effect that the compression has had on the pixel data. All you can
do is digitally "smooth" the lines with a Gaussian blur
type filter which completely obscures
the original data even more, and the end result is a completely computer generated image.
Besides the blocky compression artifacts, what you (or your silly software) has done to the middle and right image is completely blend all the pixel
data together which created MORE artifacts of a different type. It transformed the pixels into arrays of gradients.
For example, your image took the original pixel data like this...
...and turned it into this fake pixel data like this...
As you can see, the edges between each original pixel (colored square) have been smoothed to a point where you can't see them anymore. That is a
common technique to hide blocky compression artifacts. But also, in the process,it has completely created fake pixel data that didn't exist in the
first place. It created gradients that didn't exist, shadows that didn't exist, and color blends that didn't exist, and soft round features that
didn't exist, and highlights that didn't exist. Basically, the entire image is completely fake.
Your software has only one purpose, aesthetics, not image forensics.
edit on 8-9-2012 by senselessness because: (no reason given)