AWARE [SYSTEMS] Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer
AWare Systems, Imaging expertise for the Delphi developer, Home TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive

LibTiff Mailing List

TIFF and LibTiff Mailing List Archive
January 2004

Previous Thread
Next Thread

Previous by Thread
Next by Thread

Previous by Date
Next by Date

Contact

The TIFF Mailing List Homepage
This list is run by Frank Warmerdam
Archive maintained by AWare Systems



Valid HTML 4.01!



Thread

2004.01.14 12:01 "COLORMAP and byte padding", by Stephan Assmus
2004.01.14 15:07 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Frank Warmerdam
2004.01.14 16:18 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Gerben Vos
2004.01.14 16:43 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Joris Van Damme
2004.01.14 17:13 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Gerben Vos
2004.01.14 17:17 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Joris Van Damme
2004.01.14 17:26 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Andy Cave
2004.01.14 17:36 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Joris Van Damme
2004.01.14 17:24 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Phillip Crews
2004.01.14 18:18 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Marti Maria
2004.01.14 19:02 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Andy Cave
2004.01.14 19:36 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Marti Maria
2004.01.14 19:48 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Andy Cave
2004.01.15 17:24 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Marti Maria
2004.01.15 17:37 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Andy Cave
2004.01.15 00:05 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Chris Cox

2004.01.14 19:02 "Re: COLORMAP and byte padding", by Andy Cave

Hi Marti.

What "significant errors"? Please show us. As far as I know there are no
significant errors - as I said in my previous post, 0 to 255 -> 0, 256 to
511 -> 1, etc... gives an even spread reduction. How else would one want to
map these numbers? For example what do you think 127 should map to, or 128,
or 255, 256, or 511,512, etc...?

Your calculation is:

(rgb * 65281) = (rgb * (65536 - 255)) = rgb * 65536 - rgb * 255.

If I understand this correctly, all it does is map 0 to 128 -> 0, 129 to
385 -> 1, etc... which gives a non-even spread (where the end 'bands' are
half all the other bands). Why would anyone prefer this (slower method)?

_andy.