Skip to main content
Code Golf

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Looks like we have a new winner! (This one indisputably does meet the spec.) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jan 27, 2016 at 13:31
  • 9
    \$\begingroup\$ At this point it looks as though winners consist of finding good image compressions of the original (by whatever methods), with the program that's subject to the golf rules being trivial. That is to say, nobody here has any better ideas about the Kolmogorov complexity of this particular image, than what already exists in the best available image formats. Although it's interesting that this answer "looks less like" the original (to me) than Adam's does. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jan 27, 2016 at 13:32
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ @SteveJessop yeah, it's a shame, not really what I'd imagined the challenge would be like. Mostly it's because I wrote a rule about not using off-the-shelf compression methods but forgot to paste it into the challenge. I'm really interested in coming up with challenges that admit algorithmically interesting answers, and I've learned my lesson from this one. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jan 27, 2016 at 13:37
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Nathaniel: yeah, I think the issue is that BPG (or any image library) contains k's and k's of code implementing useful operations for image de/compression, all of which is available for free per the rules of this question. Beating that expertise in 1k of code, starting from scratch, is a big ask. But it's still interesting to learn that, as it turns out, the advantage of only needing to handle one particular image doesn't outweigh that. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jan 27, 2016 at 13:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @SteveJessop it's also interesting that of the entries that don't use built-in compression, the best ones just store a low resolution raster image and then blur it - the interesting optimisation-based solutions can't really compete. However, all of this may in fact be a property of the source image after all. Starry Night contains many large areas of fairly uniform colour, and is already somewhat blurred in appearance, making it ideal for such techniques. If I'd chosen an image with lots of high-contrast detail, different solutions might have been more effective. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jan 28, 2016 at 9:48