On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:05:43 -0500 Matthew of Boswell <mordervomubel+suckl...@lockmail.us> wrote:
Hey Matthew, > It's not "better"; it sucks less. There's a huge difference. > > "better" is a matter of opinion. PPM has a lot of features / alternate > formats / modes of data representation / endian choices. It supports > binary 256-color, maximum. Anything higher can be represented in ascii. > PPM was designed to handle anything and is complex enough to warrant > having its own library to parse. > > farbfeld has one format/data representation/endian choice. You write one > set of code that can handle all farbfeld images. It's a good > intermediate format. Just write converter front-ends for all other > image formats, and the farbfeld client/consumer code stays much the > same. you nailed it, nothing to add! Some attendees asked me at slcon2 about why I came up with farbfeld when ppm is available. But the point is to finally provide a simple format you don't need a finite state machine for to read it in. I've been working with libpng for 1.5 days now just to find a way to read in 16-Bit per sample PNG-data while not breaking other aspects of the program. libpng is a big mess. Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
