Jpeg 2000

[PeterMorgan0]

I've been looking at what there is about JPEG 2000. It looks awesome. 50KB compressions that still look like pictures. Why do no cameras (even at the top end, although the advantages are more obvious for middle-range cameras) offer this as an option, or even as their only JPEG, or as an optional firmware upgrade? Even a medium-level photo editor like Paint Shop Pro outputs JPEG 2000, it's a well-established standard, and there are a few web-pages out there that make it obvious how much better this is. So why no takeup of the technology? Is there just too much in-camera processing required?

[haikai]

probably for the same reason manufacturers don't let you output to any number of other image formats: compatibility (well, that and i'm sure it would cost more). i suppose there is always that chance someone out there will not be able to view or edit jpeg2k and i'm sure they want to appeal to the most consumers lest someone opt for another camera because of it. they probably want to limit having to deal tech issues that they can avoid to begin with.

i'd be all for lossless compression, but i don't foresee this feature in cameras anytime soon

hai