Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => FS2 Open Coding - The Source Code Project (SCP) => Topic started by: Fineus on September 16, 2003, 03:15:13 pm
-
This one is simple. I was just playing a mission with a nebula in it and noticed the standard "rainbow" effect on the 256bit .PCX images.
Can this be removed by upping the image color?
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
This one is simple. I was just playing a mission with a nebula in it and noticed the standard "rainbow" effect on the 256bit .PCX images.
Can this be removed by upping the image color?
256-bit images?!?!?! :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek: :eek: :eek2: :eek2:
That must be around 4 quintillion colors, dude! ;)
EDIT: This is what windows' calculator has to say:
[q]1.1579208923731619542357098500869e+77[/q]
-
Originally posted by Kalfireth
This one is simple. I was just playing a mission with a nebula in it and noticed the standard "rainbow" effect on the 256bit .PCX images.
Can this be removed by upping the image color?
this has been talked about an awfull lot, and people are working on it.
-
Well, Direct Surface support IS already available......
http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/fsscp/staffplan.php?ID=10
I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but it might just do the job ;o)
Flipside :D
-
he surely means 256-color. :lol:
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
256-bit images?!?!?! :eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :eek: :eek: :eek2: :eek2:
That must be around 4 quintillion colors, dude! ;)
EDIT: This is what windows' calculator has to say:
[q]1.1579208923731619542357098500869e+77[/q]
Egads! He must've meant 256-color.
-
:)
-
no, he means 256-bit. we need to change it to windows true color: 16 million-bit.
okay, thats enough making fun of thunder for now :D
-
Originally posted by Carl
...windows true color: 16 million-bit.
*faints*
-
That number would probably choke my Athlon XP.
-
Originally posted by Woolie Wool
That number would probably choke my Athlon XP.
That number would probably choke any computer in existence today.
-
Ok ok, you know what I meant :P
Anyway, yes, looks like the answer's being researched which is nice!
-
Thats what I said like 2 days ago ;) ;)
Hope this gets implemented, its one of the most noticable bits of old code that is remaining
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Well, Direct Surface support IS already available......
http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/fsscp/staffplan.php?ID=10
I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but it might just do the job ;o)
Flipside :D
Work this with interface 2 ?
-
Everything that uses a .pcx can have a .dds instead. ANIs, on the other hand, can't.
-
Ok how can i put alpha channels an an interface screen ? or better how make i an dds file for the interface ?
-
Originally posted by Fry_Day
Everything that uses a .pcx can have a .dds instead. ANIs, on the other hand, can't.
Is that DXT1 or DXT5? Or does it matter?
(IIRC, DXTx is .DDS right?)
-
DXT1, DXT3 and DXT5 are fine. DXT2 and 4 are pre-multiplied alpha formats, and are therefore unsupported.
Edit: Just to clarify, a .DDS file can be with any DXT compression.
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
That number would probably choke any computer in existence today.
You are underestimating the power of NASA and their stuff:)
They sent men to the moon, and they will discover the Vasudans. :)
-
Originally posted by TopAce
You are underestimating the power of NASA and their stuff:)
They sent men to the moon, and they will discover the Vasudans. :)
Hate to break it to you but the space shuttles were still using 8086 components. By the time we discover the Vasudans, NASA *might* have gotten around to making the jump to Pentiums and pocket calculators. :p ;)
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
Hate to break it to you but the space shuttles were still using 8086 components. By the time we discover the Vasudans, NASA *might* have gotten around to making the jump to Pentiums and pocket calculators. :p ;)
That's too depressing to be a lie. If they'd get out of the mindset that they must use their stuff exclusively they'd get places faster. I mean it really rams it home when you see a photo of an astronaut with a Thinkpad, and realize that it has more processing power and data storage than the SPACECRAFT it's in.
-
What was the quote about the Apollo lander? 'It couldn't add two numbers together'...
-
But then, why would it need to? It did the job, eh?
-
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
Hate to break it to you but the space shuttles were still using 8086 components. By the time we discover the Vasudans, NASA *might* have gotten around to making the jump to Pentiums and pocket calculators. :p ;)
The thing is that NASA say that they use old processors not cause they are cheap but because larger processors are less suceptible to the effects of cosmic rays.
The closer you jam all the components together on the chip the larger the chance is that a single cosmic ray can take out the whole lot.
-
Don't get my NASA thing serious! :eek2:
I was just trying to joke. :)
-
Originally posted by karajorma
The thing is that NASA say that they use old processors not cause they are cheap but because larger processors are less suceptible to the effects of cosmic rays.
The closer you jam all the components together on the chip the larger the chance is that a single cosmic ray can take out the whole lot.
Yeah, it would kinda suck to put a supercomputer in the Shuttle and then watch it get nuked by gamma rays (or even more powerful EM radiation).
-
Such as a Mekhu sidearm ;)
I suppose theres no way one of these master coders could create an ANI file that run on multiple DDS files instead of PCX's? I know someone would then have to update ANIBuild etc, but it would really be a dream come true for those wanting to do some nice effects :)
Flipside :D
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Such as a Mekhu sidearm ;)
That would blow the whole damned Shuttle up.
-
(http://www.nexus.hu/harace/hijacked.jpg)
Thread has been hijacked.
-
I believe I was asking about higher than 256 colour animation possibilities? :)
Flipside :D
-
At least a "something to ani" converter that acts like a mp3 2 pass conversion. then the ani's would have the best color palett (sp?).
-
What is this DDS stuff all about? Why can't we just use PNG/JNG/MNG? There's already libs for it, and it gives you such nifties as lossless (PNG standard) or lossy (JPEG, in JNG) compression (or a mix of both in MNG animations), arbitrary frame rate animations (MNG), and an alpha channel.
Originally posted by karajorma
The thing is that NASA say that they use old processors not cause they are cheap but because larger processors are less suceptible to the effects of cosmic rays.
The closer you jam all the components together on the chip the larger the chance is that a single cosmic ray can take out the whole lot.
So shield it? Can that provide the necessary protection, like the atmosphere does for computers on the ground?
Originally posted by WMCoolmon
Hate to break it to you but the space shuttles were still using 8086 components. By the time we discover the Vasudans, NASA *might* have gotten around to making the jump to Pentiums and pocket calculators.
With that kind of technology, the Vasudans will discover us...
-
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
So shield it? Can that provide the necessary protection, like the atmosphere does for computers on the ground?
The computers probably are shielded anyway. Cosmic rays are pretty powerful. You'd need a lot of shielding to block them all out. All shielding can do is minimise the chance of one hitting. I'm guessing that using larger processors is a way of minimising the chance of a catastrophic failure.
-
On the NASA subject, the only real way to solve the problem is redundancy. Lots of it.
On to the MNG/JNG stuff, the point is that all formats except (and I'm not suer about that) .dds are converted internally to 16-bit, so even well-done 256-color stuff actually loses quality.
-
Originally posted by Fry_Day
On to the MNG/JNG stuff, the point is that all formats except (and I'm not suer about that) .dds are converted internally to 16-bit, so even well-done 256-color stuff actually loses quality.
Why?
Originally posted by karajorma
The computers probably are shielded anyway. Cosmic rays are pretty powerful. You'd need a lot of shielding to block them all out. All shielding can do is minimise the chance of one hitting. I'm guessing that using larger processors is a way of minimising the chance of a catastrophic failure.
DNA is far more intricate and fragile than any computer, and is very sensitive to cosmic rays and other ionizing radiation. If the cosmic rays are powerful enough to penetrate the hull of the spacecraft and the shielding on the computers, they should also cause massive cancer among the humans in space. Or am I missing something?
-
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Why?
DNA is far more intricate and fragile than any computer, and is very sensitive to cosmic rays and other ionizing radiation. If the cosmic rays are powerful enough to penetrate the hull of the spacecraft and the shielding on the computers, they should also cause massive cancer among the humans in space. Or am I missing something?
The statement is actually a 100% true, except for the cancer part.
The DNA is a still smaller than a trasistor inside a CPU, and while a single loss could kill a processor, your DNA could manage sine it has special enzimes to repair itself.
The DNA is also extremely redundant. Most of the time (for most of the chromosomes) you have twice the ammount of data you need, so even if one set is corrupted, the other can take over.
There's redundancy even inside a single strain!
Still not every mutation is fatal - far from it!
Finally the human immune system destroys these alien cells the minute they are spawned if it realises their difference, so "genetic racism" actually works inside your own body.
So you see an actual severe cancer is not as likely as CPU kicking the box.
Still astrounauts recieve lot more radiation than ordinary humans (but not as much as people in Hiroshima), but they're still protected.
The Van Allen belts protect them from most of the lethal solar winds and radiation.
BTW really high energy cosmic radiation can even penetrate the Earth like it was thin air!
-
Originally posted by Flaser
The statement is actually a 100% true, except for the cancer part.
The DNA is a still smaller than a trasistor inside a CPU, and while a single loss could kill a processor, your DNA could manage sine it has special enzimes to repair itself.
The DNA is also extremely redundant. Most of the time (for most of the chromosomes) you have twice the ammount of data you need, so even if one set is corrupted, the other can take over.
There's redundancy even inside a single strain!
Still not every mutation is fatal - far from it!
Finally the human immune system destroys these alien cells the minute they are spawned if it realises their difference, so "genetic racism" actually works inside your own body.
So you see an actual severe cancer is not as likely as CPU kicking the box.
Yeah, I forgot about the fact that DNA is so resistant to damage.
So, you could put the fastest CPU in existence today in, but it would have to be huge with lots of redundant components, failover, error detection/correction, etc. And it still can't regenerate. Yuck.
I wonder what kind of shielding would be needed to give it the radiation resistance of humans? Lots of lead? Some fancy layer of contained gas? An EM field?
Still astrounauts recieve lot more radiation than ordinary humans (but not as much as people in Hiroshima), but they're still protected.
The Van Allen belts protect them from most of the lethal solar winds and radiation.
That brings me to another subject: the Van Allen belts won't help much on interplanetary voyages. What would be necessary to protect astronauts going to/from Mars, for instance? A strong but small EM field around the ship? How would one power it? An onboard nuclear reactor?
BTW really high energy cosmic radiation can even penetrate the Earth like it was thin air!
Neutrinos? Those barely leave any indication they were ever there. That's why they're so hard to detect. Remember, they have zero mass and zero charge. I don't think I've heard of anything else that can penetrate a planet like thin air. Have you?
-
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
I wonder what kind of shielding would be needed to give it [CPU] the radiation resistance of humans?.... An EM field?
:wtf: What, you wanna fry the thing yourself?
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
:wtf: What, you wanna fry the thing yourself?
Point. :D An EM field might protect humans, but it might do Bad Things™ to the circuitry of a computer -- bend the delicate microscopic wiring, alter electron flow in unpleasant ways, generate electrical currents that burn it out, or some other such stuff.
But then, maybe not -- CRTs generate powerful EM fields, and while many computer monitors of this sort have shielding on the sides to avoid inserting noise into the output of nearby speakers, some (particularly old ones) do not. Yet I have never heard of such CRTs damaging nearby microelectronics.
Cosmic rays are ionizing, and unless I'm mistaken, ionizing radiation has inherently high penetration. The EM fields from computer monitors, microwave ovens, and other such EM fields from devices in civilian use are not ionizing (the wavelength is too high), and some frequencies have a hard time penetrating anything (like visible light). Since the worst I've ever heard of an EM field doing to high-tech devices is creating speaker noise and wiping the contents of magnetic recording media, could it be that microelectronics are simply not affected by non-ionizing EM fields? Is it because they are too weak? Could a sufficiently strong EM field deflect cosmic rays? Could such a field damage microelectronics because it is too strong?
-
I don't think the penetration of the ray is linked to the fact that it is ionising or non-ionising. Gamma rays are non ionising radiation but they are very penetrating. Alpha particles on the other hand are most ionising of the three common types (alpha, beta and gamma). yet they can be stopped by a piece of paper! :D
Cosmic rays aren't actually EM despite the name. They are actually particles travelling at a fair proportion of the speed of light.
As long as the ray is charged you could deflect it with a EM field but if the particle is a neutron then the field won't do much about it.
-
well, how did they do it when they went to the moon? no van allen belt there, right? i don't know about using lots of lead, though. that's really heavy stuff, and when you're going to mars, you've gotta be really stingy with your fuel.
...i seem to remember something about 256 colors for some reason.
-
On to the MNG/JNG stuff, the point is that all formats except (and I'm not suer about that) .dds are converted internally to 16-bit, so even well-done 256-color stuff actually loses quality.
Why?
There are two 'why's that I can see. First one is, "Why are images converted to 16-bit internally", to which the answer is, they just are. I'm guessing Volition never considered storing the textures at 32-bit internally since that would be a total waste of on-board RAM when you're using an 8MB Matrox G200 or 16MB Riva TNT. That could probably be changed, but there are lots of places in which it needs to be changed.
The other question is "Why is there quality loss?"
Well, a 256-color image can choose out of 16777216 different colors (2^24), giving you 8-bits per channel. If the image is say, greyscale, it would have 256 different shades of grey (including white and black, of course), yet, a 16-bit image, stored in the 565 format, would have only 64 (2^6) shades of grey, and even then, they wouldn't be exactly grey. A lot of images with smooth gradients can suffer such problems even if they managed to be converted fine (Look at nebulae backgrounds).
And, beyond that, I just love it when this forum becomes a discussion of theoretical physics :)
-
Originally posted by karajorma
I don't think the penetration of the ray is linked to the fact that it is ionising or non-ionising. Gamma rays are non ionising radiation
Uh, gamma rays are very ionizing. As far as I know, gamma rays are the highest frequency on the EM spectrum, and also have very high penetration. They are not appreciably deflected by electric or magnetic fields (and, hence, electromagnetic fields), either. Earth's atmosphere does provide good protection from them, though -- I think it's the ozone layer.
Alpha particles on the other hand are most ionising of the three common types (alpha, beta and gamma).
Alpha and beta particles are not EM. An alpha particle is the nucleus of a helium atom (2 protons + 2 neutrons), and beta particles are electrons or positrons (antielectrons).
yet they can be stopped by a piece of paper! :D
Alpha particles are stopped by paper. Beta particles go right through it as if it weren't there. Gamma rays do too.
Cosmic rays aren't actually EM despite the name. They are actually particles travelling at a fair proportion of the speed of light.
Some of them are, some of them aren't. The term 'cosmic ray' refers to all sorts of radiation of extraterrestrial origin (usually from outside the system). This includes gamma rays, protons, alpha particles, and so on. Collision with Earth's atmosphere has interesting effects on cosmic rays, such as transforming them into some other sort of ray or particle.
As long as the ray is charged you could deflect it with a EM field but if the particle is a neutron then the field won't do much about it.
Right, EM fields only affect charged particles (and, hence, all atoms, and the nuclei and electrons in plasma). The strength of the field versus the velocity and mass of some incoming object (particle, atom, spider, ...) determines how much of an effect there is on that incoming object. This means that gamma rays are affected by EM fields, though you'd need a pretty strong field to deflect them (like Shivan shields :D ).
Originally posted by Carl
well, how did they do it when they went to the moon? no van allen belt there, right? i don't know about using lots of lead, though.
Speaking of Shivans...
Anyway, the moon's orbit is very close to the Earth, and well within its Van Allen belt, so orbital and lunar craft and personnel are protected by it.
that's really heavy stuff, and when you're going to mars, you've gotta be really stingy with your fuel.
Not if your fuel is deuterium or antimatter. :D
...i seem to remember something about 256 colors for some reason.
Probably the old software rendering engine in FreeSpace 1. Software renderers generally do 256 colors only, presumably because higher bit depths would slow them down. The software renderer is still in FS2, but it's disabled, presumably because of new graphics stuff like the full nebula.
Originally posted by Fry_Day
There are two 'why's that I can see. First one is, "Why are images converted to 16-bit internally", to which the answer is, they just are. I'm guessing Volition never considered storing the textures at 32-bit internally since that would be a total waste of on-board RAM when you're using an 8MB Matrox G200 or 16MB Riva TNT. That could probably be changed, but there are lots of places in which it needs to be changed.
Storing the textures at 32-bit internally means storing them as 32-bit on main memory, not the video hardware's texture memory. Converting to 16 bpp could be done when the textures are transferred to the video card, or it could be done when the textures are loaded off the disk, as necessary.
The other question is "Why is there quality loss?"
Well, a 256-color image can choose out of 16777216 different colors (2^24), giving you 8-bits per channel. If the image is say, greyscale, it would have 256 different shades of grey (including white and black, of course), yet, a 16-bit image, stored in the 565 format, would have only 64 (2^6) shades of grey, and even then, they wouldn't be exactly grey. A lot of images with smooth gradients can suffer such problems even if they managed to be converted fine (Look at nebulae backgrounds).
I didn't ask why there is quality loss. I know why there is loss of quality in 8 and 16 bpp -- the only way to retain the quality of a 32 bpp texture is to not convert it. :)
And, beyond that, I just love it when this forum becomes a discussion of theoretical physics :)
Since this is a forum about a space combat simulation, I would imagine that happens reasonably frequently. By the way, most of this physics stuff isn't theoretical -- it's well known physics, much of which is taught in school / college.
-
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Uh, gamma rays are very ionizing. As far as I know, gamma rays are the highest frequency on the EM spectrum, and also have very high penetration. They are not appreciably deflected by electric or magnetic fields (and, hence, electromagnetic fields), either. Earth's atmosphere does provide good protection from them, though -- I think it's the ozone layer.
My bad. I meant to say that Gamma rays are the least ionising of the three not that they are non-ionising. If you think about it, it is obvious why. While alpha and beta particles are charged particles gamma rays are an EM wave (you are correct that they are the highest on the spectrum).
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Alpha and beta particles are not EM. An alpha particle is the nucleus of a helium atom (2 protons + 2 neutrons), and beta particles are electrons or positrons (antielectrons).
Never said they were EM. You said that ionising radiation inherently has high penetration. I mention alpha particles cause they are a highly ionising form of radiation and yet their penetration is very low.
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Alpha particles are stopped by paper. Beta particles go right through it as if it weren't there. Gamma rays do too.
Reread my sentence. I never said anything about the pentration of beta particles (Stopped by a few mm of aluminum in case anyone was wondering) I was simply taking about alpha particles. :)
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Some of them are, some of them aren't. The term 'cosmic ray' refers to all sorts of radiation of extraterrestrial origin (usually from outside the system). This includes gamma rays, protons, alpha particles, and so on. Collision with Earth's atmosphere has interesting effects on cosmic rays, such as transforming them into some other sort of ray or particle.
Depends on who you listen to. I just did a google search and found 3 NASA sites that said cosmic rays were particles and one that claimed they were EM as well. Sometimes it's funny when even the experts can't decide :) :rolleyes:
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Right, EM fields only affect charged particles (and, hence, all atoms, and the nuclei and electrons in plasma). The strength of the field versus the velocity and mass of some incoming object (particle, atom, spider, ...) determines how much of an effect there is on that incoming object. This means that gamma rays are affected by EM fields, though you'd need a pretty strong field to deflect them (like Shivan shields :D ).
Try as I might I can't figure this one out. I assumed when you said cosmic rays you were talking about particles not EM. If you are talking about blocking EM too I'm really lost as to how on Earth you're planning to get an EM field to blank out another EM field? Admittedly I only took physics to the A level but stopping one EM field with another sounds like trying to prevent yourself from getting a tan by shining a giant torch at the sun.
Sure you might be able to block EM if you set up the correct pattern of interference but trying to do that using non-ionising just sounds wrong to me. If you do know more physics than me (which is a possibility since I didn't do a degree in it) I'd love to know this could work.
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Anyway, the moon's orbit is very close to the Earth, and well within its Van Allen belt, so orbital and lunar craft and personnel are protected by it.
Huh? Where on Earth are you getting that from! The Distance that the Van Allen belts extend from Earth is another thing that NASA sites seemed to disagree on but not a single one said that they extended more than 65,000 km from the Earth (with all of them saying that the strong part of the outer belt was about 19,000km above the Earth at most)
The moon on the other hand is 380,000 km away!
-
Originally posted by karajorma
My bad. I meant to say that Gamma rays are the least ionising of the three not that they are non-ionising. If you think about it, it is obvious why. While alpha and beta particles are charged particles gamma rays are an EM wave (you are correct that they are the highest on the spectrum).
EM waves are photons. Photons are charged particles.
Never said they were EM. You said that ionising radiation inherently has high penetration. I mention alpha particles cause they are a highly ionising form of radiation and yet their penetration is very low.
Ionizing EM radiation.
I assumed when you said cosmic rays you were talking about particles not EM.
Cosmic rays are all sorts of stuff -- EM, high-speed neutrons or whatever, etc.
If you are talking about blocking EM too I'm really lost as to how on Earth you're planning to get an EM field to blank out another EM field?
Two EM fields will affect each other. Anyway, we're talking about cosmic rays, not fields. An EM field to block these would have to be sufficiently strong to do so.
Sure you might be able to block EM if you set up the correct pattern of interference but trying to do that using non-ionising just sounds wrong to me.
Strength of the field has little to do with its wavelength (and, hence, whether or not it's ionizing).
If you do know more physics than me (which is a possibility since I didn't do a degree in it) I'd love to know this could work.
I didn't either.
Huh? Where on Earth are you getting that from! The Distance that the Van Allen belts extend from Earth is another thing that NASA sites seemed to disagree on but not a single one said that they extended more than 65,000 km from the Earth (with all of them saying that the strong part of the outer belt was about 19,000km above the Earth at most)
The moon on the other hand is 380,000 km away!
Eh, I seem to recall it extending far out. Nevermind...
-
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
EM waves are photons. Photons are charged particles.
I have never heard that on before. Seriously what charge do photons carry? While you're at it give me a link to a reputable source cause I've never heard of photons carrying a charge. Seriously it doesn't seem feasable to me. If the photon does carry a charge then large electric fields could be used to bend light which as far as I know is impossible (even large gravitational forces don't bend light, they bend space-time and the light travels in a straight line around the bend).
Originally posted by _argv[-1]
Two EM fields will affect each other. Anyway, we're talking about cosmic rays, not fields. An EM field to block these would have to be sufficiently strong to do so.
Strength of the field has little to do with its wavelength (and, hence, whether or not it's ionizing).
I know that strength of a field has little to do with its wavelength but to cause the required destructive interferance required to cancel out a gamma ray would need for you to be transmitting an equally powerful EM field at exactly the same wavelength (possibly a harmonic would also work but as I say it's been a while since I studied physics). I can't see how trying to cancel out a gamma ray with a non ionising EM field is any different from my example of trying to cancel out a beam of UV light from the sun with a torch.
-
My answer to both statements is something to the effect of "I don't know". This means I no longer know what I'm talking about, and will shut up now. :)
-
The crew of the Apollos weren't protected.
Yet, the whole journey took only 14days and they weren't hit by some serious solar stor IIRC.
-
Originally posted by Flaser
The crew of the Apollos weren't protected.
Yet, the whole journey took only 14days and they weren't hit by some serious solar stor IIRC.
They almost were once on one of the apollo missions. Basically there was a large solar storm while the astronauts were on the moon. NASA knew that if there was also a coronal mass ejection at the same time the astronauts were dead.
Basically everyone decided that since there was nothing they could do about it they might as well continue as normal. :D
-
I actually remember seeing a program on TLC or the Discovery Channel where astronauts on their way to the mooon spoke of seeing flashes of light when their eyes were shut. It was decided that they were seeing cosmic particles striking their retinas or other parts of the visual cortex.
Later!
-
Things in the Earth/Luna system are protected by two forces. One of which is likely to be required to make long term space travel possible.
1. The Earth EM field is so immensely powerful that it deflects a great percentage of incoming extra-solar radiation. That protection decreases as you move toward edge of the system.
2. The other force is the Sun itself. Besides it's own EM field which is orders of magnitude more potent that that of the Earth, Sol also generates a massive amount of radiation in it's own right, which would deflect a portion of any leftover extrasolar radiation.
On topic:
It's my understanding that an 256 color image uses 8 bits to store color information. A 16-bit image would be capable of storing information for 65536 colors. This would seem to be a preferable arrangement although 24 or 32 bit color would be preferable
-
Originally posted by Liberator
It's my understanding that an 256 color image uses 8 bits to store color information. A 16-bit image would be capable of storing information for 65536 colors. This would seem to be a preferable arrangement although 24 or 32 bit color would be preferable
256 color images are indexed, meaning each of the 256 colors is actually mapped to a 24-bit color. In this arrangement, you can get any 256 of the colors representable with 24-bit color, but you cannot have more than 256 unique colors in the image at once. The combined 256 colors' mappings to 24-bit colors is called a palette. FreeSpace 2 runs in 16-bit or 32-bit display modes, so different images can have different palettes, but they still have 256 colors per image.
-
From WebMonkey's article on websafe colors (http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/00/37/index2a_page3.html?tw=design):
[q]Moreover, the smallest step on the 24-bit scale (0.39216 percent) does not divide evenly into any of the values on the 15- and 16-bit scales -- well, there are two exceptions: black (0 percent) and white (100 percent). Other than those two, no colors are shared by the 8-/24-bit scale on the one side and the 15- and 16-bit scales on the other.
In other words: There are no shared colors between high color (15- or 16-bit) and true color (24-bit) depths. 24-bit is the full palette, and this is the palette we use with design programs such as Photoshop. 8-bit is a subset of that 24-bit palette. The old 216-websafe palette is a subset of the 8-bit palette, identified for browser and operating system compatibility. But the 15-bit and 16-bit palettes are not subsets of the 24-bit palette; they are entirely distinct palettes. So no matter which color you choose when you're designing (excluding black and white), you cannot choose a color that exists both in the 24-bit palette and in either the 15- or 16-bit palettes.[/q]
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
In other words: There are no shared colors between high color (15- or 16-bit) and true color (24-bit) depths.
Actually, there are 2. Remember? :D
24-bit is the full palette, and this is the palette we use with design programs such as Photoshop. 8-bit is a subset of that 24-bit palette.
An arbitrary subset, too -- see my last post regarding indexed color.
But the 15-bit and 16-bit palettes are not subsets of the 24-bit palette; they are entirely distinct palettes. So no matter which color you choose when you're designing (excluding black and white), you cannot choose a color that exists both in the 24-bit palette and in either the 15- or 16-bit palettes.
You can get pretty close, though. The human eye is sensitive to color differences, but it's not perfect.
Yet. :drevil:
-
http://www.aqsx85.dsl.pipex.com/Anims/Nebula.ani
I posted this in the modding forum, but I think it is a good example of the sort of limitations we are going to face if we stick with a single 8-bit pallete for animations, especially if we are looking to upgrade explosions and things. Here the Nebula is far too red for my tastes, I'd like more colour in it, but the problem is that because nebulae take a lot of colour gradient, to animate one and include even these somewhat iffy lightning flashes takes up more colours than the ANI can take, so some of the flashes look a bit 'broken' etc. If I had added more colours I would have got the 'banding' effect creeping in, even using bright.
I'm not saying the current system is terrible, but I DO think that we could do a lot more interesting stuff if there were some sort of higher-colour alternative, even if it is 256 colour with an index for each frame?
Flipside :D
EDIT : Also, as support for larger images grow, there is a tendency for 'less colour to go round'.
-
Originally posted by HotSnoJ
At least a "something to ani" converter that acts like a mp3 2 pass conversion. then the ani's would have the best color palett (sp?).
*cough*