Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Subotron

Boundless information storage in limited space [didn't work]

This topic is 4236 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I have written a program that is able to store N bitmaps (size AxB pixels) into just one bitmap of the same size (AxB). A complementary program is written that interprets this bitmap, and has the ability to retrieve all N original bitmaps. This way, a very large number of bitmaps can be stored into just one bitmap. (provided they are the same dimensions*, for now.) * meaning AxB is the same for every bitmap stored The program is not necessarily limited to just storing bitmaps. It could also be used for scripts, facts, or whatever information. The goal is just to store a lot of information in small space. The required time to interpret a 'bundled' file does increase with amount of data stored in this file, but I believe my algorithms can interpret the 'bundled' file relatively fast. And although the time to read such a file is larger than that of reading the original files, this algorithm can still be usefull in applications where reading time is not as important as file size. One application I can think of is that of making install files, which can now be smaller in size. Another application would be to store a movie into just one movie frame (= one bitmap). (Note that this is NOT a compression algorithm, but an alternate, small way to store multiple objects into one. These files themselves may be compressed before they are combined.) I was wondering if there are any known techniques that address the same issue, and just your thoughts about the usefullness of such an algorithm. [Edited by - Subotron on December 13, 2006 11:33:01 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
What is the algorithm, exactly? What is the value of N, A, and B? Could you post the combination of two 128x128 images along with the original images, for example?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would be very, very careful and double and triple check your results before claiming such a thing. Several claims like these have been made before. None of them have proven accurate. You've either managed something so amazing that you ought to run out and get a patent now because it will make you billions, or else you've made a simple mistake. Excuse my scepticism, but based on previous results I'm going with the latter.

Σnigma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Subotron
Another application would be to store a movie into just one movie frame (= one bitmap).

(Note that this is NOT a compression algorithm, but an alternate, small way to store multiple objects into one. These files themselves may be compressed before they are combined.)


Wait, so you are claiming you can store a full length movie and store it as just a single frame ("able to store N bitmaps (size AxB pixels) into just one bitmap of the same size (AxB). ") and you are saying it's not a compression algorithm? That's possibly THE best compression algorithm EVAR! I call shens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why stop there? If you can fit an entire movie into one frame, you could fit an entire frame into one pixel. If you set A and B to 1, and your pixels have K bits, then you can store N K-bit numbers in one K-bit value. If you set K to 1, then you can store a string of N binary digits in one bit.

(I kind of suspect N has to be 1.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Enigma
I would be very, very careful and double and triple check your results before claiming such a thing.


Actually, I find his claim quite muddled and difficult to understand. For all we know, he might just be claiming to use steganography...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thank you for all your replies. Indeed, I could be making a mistake. But I will be spending a lot of time to figure this out. Please don't interpret the first post as a claim that I have found the holy grail, but lets just say I have a suspicion. I was just wondering if (IF this works) this was something that had the huge impact you guys talk about.

But well, I'm probably overseeing something, since you guys say this hasn't been done before. I will keep you informed of the progression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If there are no contraints on the values of N, A and B then what you suggest is impossible. As has already been mentioned you could get a A x B bitmap and turn it into A * B 1 pixel bitmaps and then combine them into a single 1 pixel bitmap. Thus you could get any arbitrary sized file and turn into a single 1 pixel bitmap. That pixel will occupy n bits of storage (if the pixel is a single bit n will 1 if it's 3 bytes n will be 24 etc). That gives 2^n distinct values for the pixel and the number of different files in the universe is greater than 2^n thus you cannot compress any arbitrary sized file to a single 1 pixel bitmap which means your method cannot work (if it appears to work there's probably contraints on N, A and B that you haven't seen).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!