Talk:FlashPix

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer graphics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer graphics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer graphicsWikipedia:WikiProject Computer graphicsTemplate:WikiProject Computer graphicscomputer graphics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Browser support

The first parragraph reads only the resolution required for the current screen resolution is returned to the browser. Other than the original reference which is now gone, I've found nothing to support this. There are no relevant results for, for example, firefox supporting this behaviour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugo 87 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In 1995/6 when this format was being developed, browser for scalable images support was limited to plugins. No browser implemented this format natively, and this idea never really caught on as network bandwidth increased to outpace it.

Sean Hayes (one of the engineers at HP that worked on this format) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.220.104.174 (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I (Bob Free) was the engineering director at Live Picture (who along with Kodak and HP established the Flashpix standard) created/deployed the primary commercial Flashpix server. We implemented it as a REST interface, serving up scaled/cropped images in whatever format we wanted (at the time jpeg, png and gif)... so yes, we supported all predominant web browsers at the time. A browser, or a client-side app would make a REST call to our Flashpix server, requesting format, resolution, and cropping rect, and the server would return the appropriate image.

My team was using our Flashpix server to provide scaled/cropped texturemaps for 3D rendering. We were doing photorealistic 3D VRML authoring/rendering. Most other VRML systems at the time had to download full-resolution texturemaps; we were able to just request (via REST) the pixels we needed for the Level-of-Detail (LOD) necessary to render a given polygon at the appropriate resolution for that distance from camera. As a result, we were able to do real-time photorealistic 3D/VR rendering.

So the claim that browsers could request images at various resolutions is correct: either through a GET URL, or a REST call. The Dubious tag should be removed. Grafman (talk) 15:50, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on FlashPix. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080426013621/http://www.i3a.org/technologies/image-formats/flashpix/ to http://www.i3a.org/technologies/image-formats/flashpix/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:00, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]