parent@cis.ohio-state.edu (Richard Parent) (01/04/89)
i don't have any reference to point to, but just from memory, it seems to me that a 'bitmapped image' originally referred to an image that was represented as a bunch of bits (one or more per pixel). This was as opposed to a display list or vector representation, or alphanumeric codes to represent a text image. Rick Parent parent@cis.ohio-state.edu Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 43210
kyriazis@rpics (George Kyriazis) (01/05/89)
In article <30444@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> parent@cis.ohio-state.edu (Richard Parent) writes: > >i don't have any reference to point to, but just from memory, it seems >to me that a 'bitmapped image' originally referred to an image that was >represented as a bunch of bits (one or more per pixel). This was as opposed >to a display list or vector representation, or alphanumeric codes to >represent a text image. > I tend to agree more with Paul Heckbert. The difference is that you are describing an expression like 'bitmapped image' , while Paul means the replacement of the word 'image' by the word 'bitmap' as in 'I have a color bitmap of the mandrill' meaning of course, 'a color digitized picture of the mandrill', or something resonably close. A more appropriate expression could've been a 'bytemap' (Geesh!) for an 8 bpp image. I also think that it's not clear if the 'new' meaning of bitmap means just image or digitized image. It's a bit awkward to hear things like 'your ray-tracer produces wonderful bitmaps' (???) >Rick Parent parent@cis.ohio-state.edu >Ohio State University >Columbus, Ohio 43210 George Kyriazis kyriazis@turing.cs.rpi.edu kyriazis@ss0.cicg.rpi.edu ------------------------------
shawn@pnet51.cts.com (Shawn Stanley) (01/06/89)
A "bitmap" is not solely a graphics term. Thus, arguing over whether "bitmap"
refers to color or not doesn't make much sense.
UUCP: {rosevax, crash}!orbit!pnet51!shawn
INET: shawn@pnet51.cts.comgrinstei@hawk.ulowell.edu (Georges Grinstein) (01/06/89)
"pixmap" may be more appropriate but already is being used with a somewhat different meaning. Dr. Georges Grinstein Director - Graphics Research Laboratory grinstein@ulowell.edu University of Lowell (508)-452-5000 x2681 Lowell, MA 01854
lively@sunybcs.uucp (Richard S. Lively) (01/10/89)
Pixmap doesn't seem very satisfying either. After all, if a bitmap is a raster where each pixel is a single bit, does that make a pixmap a raster where each pixel is a single pix (?). Sounds dangerously self-referential. SPEAKING of self-referential, does anyone agree that reference 19, p. 292 in "Color Gamut Mapping and the Printing of Digital Color Images" in the October 1988 ACM TOG should receive an award for "most unique citation". I would be interested to hear if anyone has run across any similar references.
tim@vicom.COM (Tim Richardson ) (01/13/89)
It's always fun and educational and even sometimes worthwhile to listen
to technicial types argue the sematics of something...nearly always this
'something' will have TRUE value which transends the temporary and lasts
often as long as several miliseconds!
Seriously though, I can't help now but contribute to this worthy argument.
BITMAP.
This word doesn't refer to the number of bits per pixel--a single bit
per pixel image is called "binary", while more than 1 bit per pixel
is generally refered to as "grey scale."
Bitmap is from a defination of a particular type of hardware implemen-
tation of a (usually) frame buffer or image memory. It refers to the
ability of a software program to access, or manipulate, individual
bits within a pixel, without having to perform read-modify-write opera-
tions. This is similar to the term "bit slice processors", which have
the capability of "slicing" an otherwise normal word or byte access
into individual bits of the word or byte.
(the real answer remains, as always: 42)
--
Tim Richardson
| ames!vsi1!tim tim@vicom.com
Vicom Systems Inc.