On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:08:43 -0800
Daniel Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Necas (Yeti) wrote:
> > But then I, as a user, don't care about alpha, and what
> > I really care about is transparency. So everything what was
> > said can be repeated, only s/alpha/transparency/. My need
> > for pixels retaining their properties even in invisible
> > state didn't disappear.
> I think that is an excellent point, and a big vote for using
> un-premultiplied images (in fact, the only vote for using
> unpremultiplied images)
As Nick Lamb already noted, there is another good argument
against pre-multiplied alpha: loss of precision.
When you're using a single byte per color that could be
a serious problem.
Gimp-developer mailing list