If you read the conclusion, it is very clear that you should not ever break convention. You should not apply this if it would affect any other program.
That is, if your input is in u8, your output should be in u8 too. Otherwise you are “exposing” your different quantization.
I don’t think this post is telling you that you should use the 256 method. I think it is pretty clear that it is just explaining it, not advocating for it. At various points of the article it is written something like “I struggle to see a situation where it would be beneficial”.
I’m trying to understand where this rage and hatred is coming from. This isn’t some canonical interchange format here.
It breaks convention to solve an entirely nonexistent problem.
If you read the conclusion, it is very clear that you should not ever break convention. You should not apply this if it would affect any other program.
That is, if your input is in u8, your output should be in u8 too. Otherwise you are “exposing” your different quantization.
I don’t think this post is telling you that you should use the 256 method. I think it is pretty clear that it is just explaining it, not advocating for it. At various points of the article it is written something like “I struggle to see a situation where it would be beneficial”.