It means POV can't see it's own partial renders, that's what  :^)
Which in turn means the PngLib isn't up to par either, I guess.

 8^[

Anyhow, I think the output isn't going to matter far as reading it afterward
goes because the lack of a termination part isn't preventing readable files in
other programs.  It must be the "decode", as it were, at fault.
Like I know anything I'm talking about.  Get me out of here!

Bob

"Sander" <san### [at] stolscom> wrote in message news:388eb526@news.povray.org...
| This infamous 64-byte PNG doesn't open in POV-Ray using your code, giving
| the output "Error reading PNG image". A regular PNG behaves correctly. What
| can I deduce from this?
|

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 19:11:01 -0600, "Bob Hughes"
<omn### [at] hotmailcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote:

>There are several other file types I've seen opened even if a partial render the
>POV-Ray is apt to do.  Bmp, Tga, Png, have usually been okay like I said before
>except for a image program or two I used to use.  Even corrupted Jpg files will
>open (most of the time).  Have you tried any other file formats, Sander, in
>ACDSee (bmp, tga at least)?  That would narrow it down to the Png part alone.
>
>Bob

From the docs:

"* Support for most popular image formats - BMP, DCX, EMF, GIF
(including animation), IFF, JPEG, KDC, PCD, PCX, PIC, PIX, PNG, PSD,
SGI, TGA, TIFF (including multi-page and 12/16-bit samples) and WMF"

It can also convert to Jpeg, BMP, PCX (including Truecolor) and TIFF.


Peter Popov
pet### [at] usanet
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

"Peter Popov" <pet### [at] usanet> wrote in message
news:05qOOKKDi9StpK1fvi3XjbWbf0gJ@4ax.com...
| It can also convert to Jpeg, BMP, PCX (including Truecolor) and TIFF.

Convert those only and not Png files?  Maybe that's the key, Png write.  What a
wild guess though.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

In article <388f428d@news.povray.org> , "Bob Hughes" 
<omn### [at] hotmailcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote:

> It means POV can't see it's own partial renders, that's what  :^)
> Which in turn means the PngLib isn't up to par either, I guess.

No, you misunderstand something here: The image is empty, so there is no
partial render done yet. Only the last pass of mosaic preview renders is
actually written to a file, the rest is thrown away (but the image file is
opened when mosaic preview is started).  So LibPNG is perfectly fine.


     Thorsten


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

Thanks for the offer. Should I send you a copy of the e-mail dialogue, or
would that be a breach of something? You could get an idea of how they react
to my complaints, that way. I am *not* a programmer...

--
Regards,
Sander


Jon A. Cruz <jon### [at] geocitiescom> schreef in berichtnieuws
388### [at] geocitiescom...
> Let me know if you need some programmers to start browbeating them. Often
> companies won't admit problems unless you get on them with people who know
what
> they're doing. Then again, some companies just don't care.
>
> --
> "My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
> But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.
>

Post a reply to this message

>I am *not* a programmer...

Right, and I'm not a POVer... ;)

Post a reply to this message

Jon A. Cruz <jon### [at] geocitiescom> wrote in <MsgID-suppressed>:

>Let me know if you need some programmers to start browbeating them.
>Often companies won't admit problems unless you get on them with people
>who know what they're doing. Then again, some companies just don't
>care. 

Good good good attitude. I'd like to take you up on that. That's a realy good 
point. I have been struggling solo with the company that produces my registered 
software ThumbsPlus 4, which has a fatal PNG-writing bug in its latest build 
on Win32 (see http://catalpa88.tripod.com/ThumbsBug.html for info on that). 
They say they'll have that fixed for the nest release -- but that doesn't 
address all the old code that they haven't worked on (apparently) for years, 
that doesn't support PNGs (especially color-mapped ones).

If any readers care to go read my page and especially if any use ThumbsPlus, 
please write to the folks at sup### [at] ceriouscom and ceriously ask them (g) to 
pay some cerious attention (ggg) to PNG in their popular application, for a 
change.

  TIA,
     soren andersen

-- 
Using PNG-format images as Web BACKGROUNDs without
"breaking your Site" for silly older browsers:
http://www.wonderstorm.com/techstuff/
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Post a reply to this message

Sander <san### [at] stolscom> wrote in <MsgID-suppressed>:

>Thanks for the offer. Should I send you a copy of the e-mail dialogue, or
>would that be a breach of something? You could get an idea of how they react
>to my complaints, that way. I am *not* a programmer...

Since you asked ..

It would be a serious breach if you posted their replies publically without 
getting prior consent from them. [Treating people as human beings with respect 
is priority number one when you are trying to get someone to listen to you .. 
and that --respect-- is what Netiquette is basically about. But see below.]

Copying the messages to one personal friend is another matter. Lawyers can 
differ (and can go to h___). Common sense: send such communications only 
privately to a person who shares your concerns about an issue; you've been 
corresponding with a *company* (representatives thereof) in their official 
capacity. This relaxes some of the stringency of ethical dictates concerning 
priviledged communications IMO.

If a company representative is abusive to you, all bets are off -- post their 
stuff to public fora freely. THAT's a public service.

  My humble opin,
     soren andersen

-- 
Using PNG-format images as Web BACKGROUNDs without
"breaking your Site" for silly older browsers:
http://www.wonderstorm.com/techstuff/
   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Post a reply to this message

[This followup was posted to povray.windows and a copy was sent to the 
cited author.]

In article <8F78B0EC4soren2000j@news.povray.org>, 
sor### [at] noYOUknowWHATjunocom says...

> Since you asked ..
> 
> It would be a serious breach if you posted their replies publically without 
> getting prior consent from them. [Treating people as human beings with respect 
> is priority number one when you are trying to get someone to listen to you .. 
> and that --respect-- is what Netiquette is basically about. But see below.]
> 
> Copying the messages to one personal friend is another matter. Lawyers can 
> differ (and can go to h___). Common sense: send such communications only 
> privately to a person who shares your concerns about an issue; you've been 
> corresponding with a *company* (representatives thereof) in their official 
> capacity. This relaxes some of the stringency of ethical dictates concerning 
> priviledged communications IMO.
> 
> If a company representative is abusive to you, all bets are off -- post their 
> stuff to public fora freely. THAT's a public service.

Hi, are you in the know about those 64-byte PNG's? I still have them and 
they still freeze my ACDSee viewer. There has not been a definitive 
recognition of the problem by the makers of ACDSee. But I can live with 
them...

-- 
----------------
Regards,  Sander

Post a reply to this message