CAMG

Article View: comp.sys.amiga.tech

Article #13048

Back to comp.sys.amiga.tech Previous Next

#13048

From: => robart <=
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 1989 06:51

14 lines
1381 bytes

In article <12085@well.UUCP> shf@well.UUCP (Stuart H. Ferguson) writes:

>  The only bits you should really look at (and save!) in the CAMG word are
>the HAM and HALFBRIGHT bits.  The way to decide if the image should be
>displayed as interlace or not is to look at the aspect ratio and image size in
>the BMHD property.  The BMHD is always provided -- if not, the ILBM is broken.

  I think a better way to decide if the image is LACE or HIRES is to look at
the information in the CAMG chunk.  After all, if you're going to write it out
anyway what is the point in leaving out important information?  The less there
is for the reader program to have to figure out, the better.  Besides, using
the aspect ratio can be unreliable.  Some programs don't set it correctly, and
even if they do the ratios are different for NTSC and PAL machines, and you
have no information in the file to tell you which type it was created on.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1373@psueea.UUCP>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!psueea!psu-cs.cs.pdx.edu!bartonr

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!psueea!psu-cs.cs.pdx.edu!bartonr
From: bartonr@psu-cs.cs.pdx.edu (=> robart <=)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: CAMG
Message-ID: <1373@psueea.UUCP>
Date: 10 Jun 89 06:51:51 GMT
Sender: news@psueea.UUCP
Reply-To: bartonr@psu-cs.cs.pdx.edu (=> robart <=)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Portland State University; Portland OR
Lines: 14