Thursday, 3 July 2008

M3 demonstrate the impact that file format, compression techniques, image resolution and colour depth have on file size and image quality.










In the screenshots provided you can see that the first image is not compressed and that the second however is. The following are all factors which help to compress a file, but at the users discretion and at the images cost. By altering a files format, for example changing a bitmap to a jpeg, can severely affect the quality of the image and if done to an extreme extent can make the image unclear and very pixilated. The resoloution of the image is lowered during the compression process and therefore can result in the image being pixilated and grainy. File compression can also be achieved by altering an images colour. By reducing the amount of colour in an image you can reduce its file size, but this reduces the quality of the image yet again. Cropping and resizing the image can save memory and can result in a not so greater loss of image quality.

The basic understanding is that the highter the quality and size of an image the larger the file size, and vice versa. The higher the resoloution and the more colour the image contains the larger the file is going to be. File formats are basically preset quality settings which detract certain qualities of an image to compensate for the amount of space in which the image is going to aquire.

M2 demonstrate the use of two advanced techniques in graphics manipulation













Firstly; i took the image when i visited Blackpool beach as you can see the original image is dull and un-interesting. To manipulate this image i initially altered the contrast and brightness of the photo drastically using Photoshop, I then grabbed each section of the image seperately, using the 'magic wand' tool i was able to select the majority of the sea and replace the original colour using the 'photo filter' tool using the 'deep blue' colour and changing the density to create different shades. Any remaining sea was then selected using the 'quick selection' tool and a different shade 'photo filter' was added and altered using the density measure to create an in-depth look mainly in the far background. To make the peaked waves stand out i defined their edges using the 'sharpen' tool and then then contrast to make them dark and stand out. To create a 'surreal' looking sky i selected each cloud individually using the 'magic wand' tool and added different shades and intensities of blues, violets and oranges through the photo filter tool. I then defined the edges of the clouds to make them stand out even more using the 'sharpen edges' tool, after this manipulation i altered the hue of the clouds using the 'hue/contrast' tool. To create final touches i selected the housing and pier line using the 'magic wand' tool and manipulated as much as possible by lowering the exposure level, lowering offset levels and highering the gamma correction on the 'exposure...' tool. I then flattened the image and altered brightness/contrast overall as a whole until i was happy with my final piece, i then lowered the image size and saved my image as a JPEG file.







M1 compare the limitations of at least two different hardware devices and two different software packages utilised for the capture, manipulation...

Paint & Photoshop.

Photoshop is a very in depth and complex graphics application with many of tools and advanced manipulation techniques at hand. The adobe suite is the industry standard for graphic manipulation and production which tells you already how advanced and professional this programme is. There are many tools that can be used in photoshop such as the alteration of hue, contrast, saturation, brightening, and lightening. There are also other very useful tools to name a few; the magic wand and the lasso tool. All of the techniques listed are professional and modern ways of graphic manipulation and production. Compared to paint it is easy to see that photoshop is utilised for advanced graphic manipulation. There are very basic features in paint such as the ability to crop and resize an image and to add text and auto shapes but other than this all other tools required to produce an advanced graphic are absent. Paint lacks tools such as layering and magnetic cropping, which amongst many are huge negative factors against this programme which is why Photoshop would be the definite application to use when in need of a professional grpahic manipulation, despite of its high price.

RAM - 512mb DDR (333mhz) vs 1gb DDR2 (667mhz)

immediately you can see there is a difference in the two stated peices of hardware. Firstly one is DDR and the other is DDR2 which basically means one is single channel memory and the other is dual channel memory, this results in faster process times and allows the system to have more applications running simutaneously. 512mb is clearly less memory that 1gb which will also affect performance as it cannot run as many applications or perhaps a single large application as efficient and fast as 1gb stick of RAM could. And lastly the speed of the RAM is different and almost double! this will obviously result in faster loading speeds and better fluency when running large programmes, perhaps a game for example. 512mb of RAM is just not enough to run a graphics programme as smooth as it would need to be, it would cause endless problems such as crashing and would often be very "laggy".

Processor - 3.2ghz pentium 4 HT (1mb L2 cache) vs Intel core 2 duo E8400 3.0ghz (6mb cache)

the limitations of the 3.2ghz p4 compared to the core 2 duo would be as follows;

1) the clock speed of the single core processor would not be able to process data as quick as the core to duo would maninly due to the fact the core 2 duo has 2 subcores allowing it to break down the data faster and more efficiently.

2) The cache comparison between the two processors would also be a large factor in limiation terms because it cannot communicate to other components as quickly therefore this could result in slower loads times, slow on screen performance and even crashing.

The 3.2ghz processor would be able to handle a graphics manipulation programme if used alongside a strong rig but would still not function as fluently or as reliable as a core 2 duo processor would.