 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
+fn16 produces 24bit png in 3.1g and mega 0.5. Stats says 48bpp. Win95.
K.K.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3990AA10.9DDAE53D@kivisalo.net> , Kari Kivisalo
<kar### [at] kivisalo net> wrote:
> +fn16 produces 24bit png in 3.1g and mega 0.5. Stats says 48bpp. Win95.
Hmm, it work just fine for me.
Are you sure you are using a program that supports 16 bit per colour
component PNG images? I know a few that will read any PNG but convert it to
8 bit per colour component.
You can test if it works by using any scene with 8 and then 16 bit per
colour component and simply compare the file sizes. Even with compression
the 16 bit per colour component image will be larger.
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
[...]
>
> Are you sure you are using a program that supports 16 bit per colour
> component PNG images? I know a few that will read any PNG but convert it to
> 8 bit per colour component.
>
> You can test if it works by using any scene with 8 and then 16 bit per
> colour component and simply compare the file sizes. Even with compression
> the 16 bit per colour component image will be larger.
>
> Thorsten
I use +fn16 for 16 Bit heightfields (hf_gray_16) and it works (at least with
megapov)
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You should know better and not post binary attachments to a non-binaries
group.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39912556.174ADE9F@kivisalo.net> , Kari Kivisalo
<kar### [at] kivisalonet> wrote:
>> Are you sure you are using a program that supports 16 bit per colour
>> component PNG images?
>
> Photoshop 5.5 says it's 16bit but displays this.
> Looks like high/low bytes are reversed.
That would be a Photoshop problem...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> You should know better and not post binary attachments to a non-binaries
> group.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Oh? And what do you call the data string in your sig? ;)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> Warp wrote:
> > main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> > ):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
>
> Oh? And what do you call the data string in your sig? ;)
Source. Certainly not a binary, at least not in the technical sense.
Then again, I don't think it's entirely proper to post PPM files to text
groups. ;-)
-Mark Gordon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3991A8AF.D654D090@faricy.net>, David Fontaine
<dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
> Oh? And what do you call the data string in your sig? ;)
His signature is two lines of somewhat human-readable text, in the
message and not as an attachment, written in a programming language (C),
and generated by a human. The image was a ~50KB JPEG image file
attachment. There is a big difference.
Messages with file attachments(including attachments of text files) go
in one of the binary groups, only post text messages to text groups.
--
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
> That would be a Photoshop problem...
Is there _any_ app that can open pov 48bit output and save as uncompressed
tif or raw? I guess there isn't raw output option for advanced users because
advanced users just patch it in if they need it :). I'm not going to patch yet.
K.K.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:13:22 +0300, Kari Kivisalo <kar### [at] kivisalonet>
wrote:
>Is there _any_ app that can open pov 48bit output and save as uncompressed
>tif or raw? I guess there isn't raw output option for advanced users because
>advanced users just patch it in if they need it :). I'm not going to patch yet.
I think ImageMagick and/or the GIMP can do it. Both are for Unix but
there are Windows ports and I think there are ports to other popular
OSs.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
