🚀 go-pugleaf

some more bitmap thoughts...

 
 
While postscript is indeed a raster type language, and your points on that 
are very well taken, and said, it should be realized that the core graphics
primatives are just as applicable to vector devices.  Now, while it would
be difficult to implement gray shades on a MECHANICAL vinyl cutter, there
does exist as subset of ps, consisting of the curveto, arcto, lineto,moveto
and relative versions, as well as the transforms that are very applicable.
An implementation that could only do black or white (material removal or 
not) is a useful and valid set of postscript.  It would not be difficult
to do grayshades and fills on a waterjet cutter, abrasive stream cutter,
or lasercutter for fabrics, wood, vinyl, paper, metal etc.  These are
typicaly vector devices.  The cutter stays stationary, and the table
holding the material to be cut, moves, and moves directly from point A
to point B, not via rastering. A related device is the TEKTRONICS 4015
type terminal.  A vector device, that could be made to run PS rather 
nicely.  Many of these would not need a bit map, and thus the arguement 
that bitmaps are perhaps needed would not hold for some of these, although
the COULD be implemented via a bitmap.
 
The bitmap is the "rosetta stone" of the graphics world.  Postscript is 
not.  What I mean, is that a bitmap is the lowest common denominator for
graphics representation.  If I want to move an image between a sun, or a
mac, or a pc, the way to do it, is to convert bitmaps.  If I want to 
display a mac image on my pc, I can convert the bitmap.  If I digitize
a video source on my pc, and wish to transfer it elsewhere, I use a bitmap.
Currently there is no language to describe digitized video images.  If I
want to print these images, Postscript will even allow me to do that with
the image operator.  If I generate a page in Postscript, the bitmap should 
be available to other entities.  Postscript won't allow that.  This appears
to me to be rather myoptic.
 
Consider:  I create a complex page that takes 20 min or more running under
postscript.  I wish to create a slide for a presentation.  What are my 
choices?
 
1.	Purchase an *EXPENSIVE* postscript to slide converter/printer
	unit.
2.	Print it out, then photograph it (the most common way).  Perhaps
	photographicaly transfer the video image to slide, or photograph
	the page with a video camera (losing a LOT of resoluteion)
3.	Grab the bitmap, and send it to an inexpensive bitmap to slide
	converter, or send it to a video recorder.
	
Now: number 3 does not do much for Adobe, as a competing media (bitmap vs
postscript) output device is used.  If I use a PS interpreter to generate
the bitmap it does.
 
The bottom line, is that bitmaps are VERY valuable things to have around,
they may be big, but hardly ugly.  They are a fact of life.  The world does 
NOT revolve around an abstract page description language, and certainly 
never will, as it is not suitable for all things.  Neither are bitmaps, but
they are a good deal more general purpose than the page description 
language.  I have a real problem with the attitude that "nothing else 
matters...We set the standard", whether it is IBM (the microchannel)
or Microsoft (OS/2 ) or Alan Bradley (industrial controllers) or.......
you name it.
 
 
Cheers
Woody
 
 


Cheers
Woody