ccc_ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) (06/28/90)
I'd like to agree with Rich Siegel's point (in <3303@husc6.harvard.edu>) about not everyone having Color QuickDraw, and to add to it. Not everyone who has Color QuickDraw has a CLUT display. No CLUT display, no nice CLUT dissolves. (Well, you can do gamma dissolves, but that's another story). Lawrence D'Oliveiro Computer Services Dept fone: +64-71-562-889 University of Waikato fax: +64-71-384-066 Hamilton, New Zealand electric mail: ldo@waikato.ac.nz
ccc_ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) (06/28/90)
In <554@ohs.UUCP>, stay@ohs.UUCP (Steve Taylor) suggests: "What about using n stages of patterns, and drawing the original picture (off of just one off-screen bitmap) n times masked through the pattern? (Paint the source picture with the pattern and the correct transfer mode and use copy-bits with the right mode to transfer each stage over.)" The whole point of my original posting was to do the dissolve as *quickly* as possible using standard QuickDraw calls, and secondarily to avoid using too much memory. If you draw the source picture n times, you need n source pixmaps (in the case of colour). For maximum speed, these pixmaps should be the same depth (and have the same CLUT) as the current screen setting. With my original approach, you only need one such pixmap; all the rest are one-bit- per-pixel bitmaps. So I think my approach consumes significantly less memory, as well as being faster (only one DrawPicture call). Still, might be worth actually trying it... Lawrence D'Oliveiro fone: +64-71-562-889 Computer Services Dept fax: +64-71-384-066 University of Waikato electric mail: ldo@waikato.ac.nz Hamilton, New Zealand 37^ 47' 29" S, 175^ 19' 16" E, GMT+12:00 Schrodinger's Cat may have died for your sins.