| Re: PING: EAX, mr. bill - CSV list - 1 attachment - LS Land 26 lhv-Hawaiian Breeze Complete_mb_3382.csv |
|
| n@@dles (n@@dles) |
2009/01/16 10:42 |
Path: news.nzbot.com!news.astraweb.com!border5.newsrouter.astraweb.com!indigo.octanews.net!news-out.octanews.net!mauve.octanews.net!nx01.iad.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196.98.140.MISMATCH!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local02.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:42:12 -0600
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.picture.ls-series
Subject: Re: PING: EAX, mr. bill - CSV list - 1 attachment - LS Land 26 lhv-Hawaiian Breeze Complete_mb_3382.csv
From: "n@@dles" <n@@dles>
References: <Xns9B90E1E35B518ndles@216.196.109.131> <496ba1cb$0$31171$450c70f1@news.privacy.li> <Xns9B9233516DA3ndles@216.196.109.131> <Q5adnRFSV_9hufHUnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@gonamic.de> <Xns9B92DA1E1203Andles@216.196.109.131> <O_Odna-5_uhj1PDUnZ2dnUVZ8omdnZ2d@gonamic.de> <Xns9B9453F86525ndles@216.196.109.131> <dKidnX0on5q4K_PUnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@gonamic.de>
Message-ID: <Xns9B95B415D9C67ndles@216.196.109.131>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:42:12 -0600
Lines: 75
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-6F9FU+/FvKcDY2ORCcgLMzbcTKuwC1LiKPWZkD/KfPTIq5PluMTqTsID/e+fhDTTKZEnRkWqA9enqx2!i3r0ldHZgYAf5NVKRnU08KdVjQDx+8Bszq9ZBHYD7GqjgiKZFme0Vs4K5dsCvDU=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.39
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.picture.ls-series:464
>
> I guess I wasn't aware they were of two differing sizes until you
> pointed it out. I would normally expect such corruption to come from
> a truncated file. In that case, being too small is not of concern
> since the non-truncated version of the file would be larger.
>
> When I looked at both with a hex editor I was struck by their
> similarity. In fact, they were byte-for-byte identical up to the
> point of corruption of your file. The real difference was that your
> file was not truncated, it had an end of image marker, whereas CD's
> file was truncated. However, CD's file had good image bytes up to the
> point of truncation, yours did not stay good that deep into the image.
>
> That's when I got the bright idea to copy the extended good portion of
> CD's file and allow it to overwrite that same corrupt portion of
> yours. My hope was that maybe the corrupt area would get overwritten
> with good bytes at which point maybe there wouldn't still be any
> corruption. So in effect, the whole file could be repaired.
>
> Alas, not to be! The image simply became good a bit further, enough
> to match the area of good in CD's version, but the corruption
> immediately set in again. Thinking there may have been a loss of sync
> in transmission, I searched both copies of the files for short
> sequences of bytes in the other. There was no point where the two
> files had even a tiny amount of congruity past the point of corruption
> in your image. There was no way to put the files in sync and create a
> full image.
>
> My next guess was that the original truncated file had been on a
> crashed hard drive, and that during recovery it had gotten
> cross-linked with another file, thus ending up with an end of image
> marker. So I searched all the other files in the folder for a short
> sequence of bytes found in the corrupt area of your copy of the file.
> Nothing!
>
> My last attempt at sanity was to measure the height of the image frame
> on my monitor, and the height of the good part of the image as
> presented by CD's version, then worked out the ratio of good to bad
> and calculated a presumed full file size for a complete file. It
> matched yours within 4k but it seems evident to me your copy contains
> bytes from some other jpeg.
>
> I'm stymied.
>
> I checked the other file too. They both remain congruent up to the
> point of corruption, which is very deep in the file. CD's file
> finishes off fine, no corruption in the horizontal, and has an end of
> image marker.
>
> Your copy goes corrupt in the horizontal near the end. It too has an
> end of image marker, but is a much larger file than CD's - remember
> the two are congruent to the point of corruption, so it stands to
> reason it too has the ending bytes from some other jpeg.
>
> Now I'm really stymied!
>
I agree - your evidence has convinced me :)
It does seem as tho my versions have been the product of a merger to try
and correct the corruption and so hence the larger size. This is the usual
trick so seems quite likely.
I would say we should go with the CD images then.
Just leaves the thumbnail - the CD thumb appears completely different from
the other thumbs. I suspect this comes from when they changed it from UA to
GA. I ripped GA whereas CD had ripped UA. Quite unusual :)
Anyway i'd rather stick with my version of the thumb more for consistency
than anything but in this case im happy to go with either :)
Regards
n@@dles
|
|
|