Steve wrote:
>
> The strange thing here is that xv displays it
> perfectly, telling me that it's a Windows BMP
> using 4-bit color, and "Got all 7 colors (6 unique),
> while ImageMagick (also displaying it perfectly) says
> it's a Microsoft Windows bitmap image using a color
> depth of 8 bits, and a palette of 16 colors.
>
> ... so this must mean some flaw in the way Arachne
> displays certain BMP file formats.
>
> I wonder if Michael will be abandoning BMP format
> when he changes to the cross-platform version.
Although possible, it wouldn't make any sense to me.
The .BMP format is used because in its most rudimentary incarnation it
is the format the video cards use - simply a video memory dump.
There is some header info prepended to this basic data describing the
size, color depth and compression - if any. As long as no compression
is used, the data file will be a video image and very simple to load,
manipulate, and unload (shoot).
It's the tendency of some twits to avoid simplicity at any cost that
brings in the screwups.
As soon as you add either compression (what method ?) or dumb color depths
like 32 bits in a world where 24 bits makes some sense and 8 bits makes
more sense, then the simplicity of the screen dump and reload idea is gone.
- Clarence Verge
--
- Help stamp out FATWARE. As a start visit: http://home.arachne.cz/
- The internet is infected - Windows is a VIRUS !!
--
