epub and kindle format on one eReader?

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

So, you, writing in colloquial German, expect Google Translate to a produce perfect translation for us to read. Then you expect Google Translate to produce a perfect translation of our colloquial English.

No - only if someone wants to understand my contribution, then he will make an effort, if not, then that is not my problem

Um, because you said it? What else could that post mean? You said that people only understand up to their comprehension. As you clearly believe you understand, then you are stating that no one else is as smart as you.

This is not a stringent conclusion - I don't care if that could also be the case..

And I do agree with @BookCat. It is a childish insult. But, of course, as you are fond of pointing out, it must be the translation at fault and our lack of comprehension that the translation is at fault.

Whether a translation is to blame for that, I'm not interested.
I use translators; whether the result is understood lies in
a) the will to understand, then one accepts translation errors
b) on the ability.
And this has nothing to do with the quality of my statement - the correctness is provable, and if a mistake should happen to me, then I (also) stand by it.

While I partly agree with that, with the argument going on, the fact is that no one has agreed with you. As there is such solid disagreement with you, I would expect someone that did agree with you to come forward and state so. Especially as there is a language issue, I would expect that someone who agreed with you would chime in to help sort that out.

a) I don't think these posts are read by many.
b) Why should anyone defend me? I don't do it either - so I'm not surprised.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

No - only if someone wants to understand my contribution, then he will make an effort, if not, then that is not my problem
This is not a stringent conclusion - I don't care if that could also be the case..
Whether a translation is to blame for that, I'm not interested.
I use translators; whether the result is understood lies in
a) the will to understand, then one accepts translation errors
b) on the ability.
And this has nothing to do with the quality of my statement - the correctness is provable, and if a mistake should happen to me, then I (also) stand by it.
a) I don't think these posts are read by many.
b) Why should anyone defend me? I don't do it either - so I'm not surprised.

OK, I'll give up. That is a load of justifications to prove to yourself that you are the smartest person here. You are claiming that you are the only person right, that the automatic Google translation must be correct and that anyone who can't see that is wrong and probably an idiot. So, I'll just keep calling you Sheldon. Which as I said, is a poor joke, but, is pretty accurate description of your apparent opinion of yourself.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

OK, I'll give up. That is a load of justifications to prove to yourself that you are the smartest person here. You are claiming that you are the only person right, that the automatic Google translation must be correct and that anyone who can't see that is wrong and probably an idiot. So, I'll just keep calling you Sheldon. Which as I said, is a poor joke, but, is pretty accurate description of your apparent opinion of yourself.

And this contribution is a proof of blooming fantasy and insinuations of statements that I never made.
A prime example that there was little effort or ability to understand the statements.

BTW: do I need to know what Sheldon is?

[pazos]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

You're being ridiculous if you think something like this happens from Kobo with images in purchased books on their devices - which are, if not in color, often in 256 shades of gray.

I talk about facts. You can review my posts in this thread. I will resume them to you to make things easier:

- ebooks use color images because their primary target isn't just e-ink devices
- color images don't match the e-ink palette, so they're prone to color banding artifacts (as the first image in the link I gave you)
- dithering is applied to images to prevent these artifacts.
- on device dithering (HW or SW) doesn't produce better results than preprocessing images with an specialized software, like ImageMagick, but it is way better than original images.

I know it could be harsh for you to understand that because you have some sort of magical belief but dithering doesn't afect the resolution of an image..

If you see a pixelated image that's not because of dithering. It is a match of a low quality image paired with a css rule that enlarges the image, making its low resolution more obvious.

But you don't care about facts and I don't care about insults. So please believe what you want. I'm out.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by pazos

I talk about facts. You can review my posts in this thread. I will resume them to you to make things easier:

- ebooks use color images because their primary target isn't just e-ink devices

This may or may not be the case, I know books with 256 grayscale images, as well as some only black and white - but let's assume that.

- color images don't match the e-ink palette,

Yes.

so they're prone to color banding artifacts (as the first image in the link I gave you)

No - I don't know of any device that performs like this * - thus the following is

- dithering is applied to images to prevent these artifacts.

unnecessary.

- on device dithering (HW or SW) doesn't produce better results than preprocessing images with an specialized software, like ImageMagick, but it is way better than original images.

This reference is not necessary, because such a thing is not done when looking at the book.

I know it could be harsh for you to understand that because you have some sort of magical belief but dithering doesn't afect the resolution of an image..

If you see a pixelated image that's not because of dithering. It is a match of a low quality image paired with a css rule that enlarges the image, making its low resolution more obvious.

Your post indicates that you don't know Kobo.

Here in this forum the simulation of 256 gray levels was called dithering and so I used this one

And Kobo does this by assigning a corresponding predefined 4*4 pixel image to the average brightness value of a 4*4 pixel grid and displaying it - at 300 dpi this results in a resolution of 75 (300/4), at 227 it is 57 (227/4).

Edit *: this image cannot be displayed by EInk - it contains much more gray values at the borders of the gray levels than EInk (16) is able to display.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Your post indicates that you don't know Kobo.

And I do know Kobo and have discussed how they process the images for display with the Kobo developer who did the work. This included the issues they have because the use the Adobe RMSDK in some places and other libraries in other places. This included supplying test cases and testing beta version of the firmware to see the results.

Here in this forum the simulation of 256 gray levels was called dithering

It is the only word I have seen used here and elsewhere to describe this. I did search elsewhere, and it seemed to be the correct word. The Wikipedia article on Dithering seems to agree with this. In fact, the first sentence in the section on digital images is:

Dithering is used in computer graphics to create the illusion of color depth in images on systems with a limited color palette.

And that sounds exactly like what you would do for "simulation of 256 gray levels".

If we are using an incorrect term, can you please tell us what the correct one is? You might need to post that in German so that Google does not mess it up in the translation.

and so I used this one

And Kobo does this by assigning a corresponding predefined 4*4 pixel image to the average brightness value of a 4*4 pixel grid and displaying it - at 300 dpi this results in a resolution of 75 (300/4), at 227 it is 57 (227/4).

Which sounds like an example of a dithering algorithm to me. It isn't one that produces a "random" effect, so it probably has some undesirable affects which can depend on what the input. It's probably more like to cause a moiré pattern than other dithering algorithms.

I am curious about your example. Can you tell me which Kobo device and firmware that image was produced with? Even better would be the source of the image so that I can look at it on my devices. If it is somewhere I can legally download it, can you point it out for me to try?

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by davidfor

I am curious about your example. Can you tell me which Kobo device and firmware that image was produced with? Even better would be the source of the image so that I can look at it on my devices. If it is somewhere I can legally download it, can you point it out for me to try?

The book, the screenshot, Kobo Glo HD, Softwareversion: 4.26.16704 (0af09acc53, 10.02.21)

[ottischwenk]

I received a private message - two attempts to reply simply disappeared; therefore I reply here.

"Downloading a work protected by copyright from the internet constitutes an act of reproduction, regardless of the means and technology used. [...] Additionally, Austrian copyright law requires that the source copy of the download was not obviously (produced or) made available unlawfully (Article 42(5) of the Austrian Copyright Act[...]"

Bold added.

https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/e...47e272839a6fe9

Please don't claim you're not breaking Austrian copyright law by downloaded from pirate sites.

a) did you read and understand Q15?

b) In my paper library there are only books whose authors died before 1950 - so none with copyright: and since I only search for those, it is impossible to violate Q8 - by the way in my opinion wrongly translated and/or interpreted (because this text in the law can also be translated and interpreted differently, namely correctly according to the German language rules).
Q8 means that before downloading, you would have to know that the work has been put online illegally, and that is impossible - I have so much trust in our parliament that such nonsense cannot be decided.

Even regardless of the idiotic Q8, I'm allowed to download the books I'm looking for from anywhere - because they don't contain copyright.

So stop with the insinuations and also slanders.

[ottischwenk]

Since I received a new message, to which I could not answer - my answer here:

Perhaps you could have mentioned that you only download out-of-copyright works? At some point in your long campaign against people who remove DRM? That would have bypassed the whole issue of exactly what Austrian Law says about downloads.

I already wrote that many times, at least also by referring to my German leather/goldcut library - in such a library there are no books of living authors.
And I will certainly not list all my posting activity in each of my posts.

Nevertheless, it is irrelevant - because no Austrian law correctly interpreted according to German language rules says that a download of books with copyright is illegal; this is only claimed in a linguistically incorrect translation or idiotic - because impossible to perform - interpretation.

Oh yes: it is very difficult to obey laws that require something impossible.

[salamanderjuice]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

I received a private message - two attempts to reply simply disappeared; therefore I reply here.

a) did you read and understand Q15?

b) In my paper library there are only books whose authors died before 1950 - so none with copyright: and since I only search for those, it is impossible to violate Q8 - by the way in my opinion wrongly translated and/or interpreted (because this text in the law can also be translated and interpreted differently, namely correctly according to the German language rules).
Q8 means that before downloading, you would have to know that the work has been put online illegally, and that is impossible - I have so much trust in our parliament that such nonsense cannot be decided.

Even regardless of the idiotic Q8, I'm allowed to download the books I'm looking for from anywhere - because they don't contain copyright.

So stop with the insinuations and also slanders.

The books you are looking for don't contain copyright? Even that Spice and Wolf Vol. 1 manga? Pretty sure Hasekura is still alive and pumping out new Spice and Wolf novels...

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by salamanderjuice

The books you are looking for don't contain copyright? Even that Spice and Wolf Vol. 1 manga? Pretty sure Hasekura is still alive and pumping out new Spice and Wolf novels...

Perhaps you could see that I linked to the distribution page to the reading sample provided there!

And that was provided there for general download.

[ottischwenk]

And because again my attempt to answer disappeared in nirvana:

How many Mobileread members do you think could correctly make that inference? I certainly couldn't.

The part before the comma is ignored!
What comes after that is only an explanation and has meaning only through this.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

And because again my attempt to answer disappeared in nirvana:
The part before the comma is ignored!
What comes after that is only an explanation and has meaning only through this.

When you reply to a private message, your reply appears in your list of sent messages, not your list of received messages.

I clearly received your messages. Reposting here when I was trying not to derail the thread further is a bit rude.

I have searched all your messages on Mobileread to look for any mentioning "public", and found only 13. Only your recent messages (since my PM) mention that you only download public domain ebooks.

Only your two recent message in this thread contain the word 'goldcut'. There are no other mentions on MobileRead.

Perhaps you thought you had mentioned this before, but if you did, it must have been cryptic. I will search no longer.

If you had mentioned that you only downloaded public domain ebooks, in a clear manner, a lot sooner, a lot of confusion could have been avoided.

[pdurrant]

Moderator Notice
Further discussion in this thread of the issues of the legality of removing DRM for personal use, and the precise meaning of Austrian copyright law as regards downloads of copyright material is forbidden, and any such posts will be deleted.

Anyone wishing to continue those discussions should start a new thread in General Discussions.

[pdurrant]

Moderator Notice
Discussion of anything off-topic in this thread is forbidden at the moment.