On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 23:03 -0400, Kevin Fishburne wrote:

> That will probably work, but there should be a mathematical way to 
> compensate for not cropping the image twice, or even once. As long as 
> the entire image is preserved by the rotation function (it is) and it 
> behaves in a predictable manner (it does), the camera's coordinates 
> should be able to be translated and rotated so that they are in the same 
> position in the rotated image as they were in the non-rotated image. For 
> the sake of efficiency that is what I'm trying to accomplish.
> 
This thread might help. (or not)

http://forums.libsdl.org/viewtopic.php?t=2983&sid=1d2c6a94470c0fd56f3f542cd702ec37




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the
growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses
are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software 
be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker 
today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar
_______________________________________________
Gambas-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user

Reply via email to