> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 16:03:49 +0200
> From: 7egg...@online.de
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP's "EGA" default palette (fwd)
> > Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:21:58 -0300
> > From: "Joao S. O. Bueno" <gwid...@mpc.com.br>
> > To: Richard <strata_ran...@hotmail.com>
> > Cc: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP's "EGA" default palette
> > Message-ID:
> > <cah0mxts1nzmn3toarrjr+xhftizoo7-3ket6wevvwzbymaw...@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > Thanks. I have never heard that before (and so far am unable to find any
> > citations about it).
> Now at the same time, clearly this is not the set of 16 colors by
which EGA is most commonly known. Shouldn't we have a palette for that?
> I missed some postings, but I have documentation about EGA cards.
> The colors were from a palette of 64 colors, with each bit corresponding
> to a separate wire. Low-intensity colors have a high
> [ . . . ]
I have already read through that article (plus a few others on the matter).
And it only took a few minutes to set up my own .gpl palette with the 16- and
64-color CGA/EGA palettes, before I originally posted the question.
I still wonder about the peculiar choice of hues in ega.gpl (yes you did cover
that already, I just haven't found anything to corroborate it) ... but for now
I think to avoid personal confusion I'll just drop that default palette from my
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address: email@example.com
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list