RLE

[Dar Scott]

On Jul 27, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Ben Rubinstein wrote:

> I'm having trouble understanding why anyone wants it.  (This is  
> sincere, not
> snide.)

I'm just trying to learn if I want it.

> But why does anyone care what the RLE format is?  It's just used  
> internally.
> We don't need to understand the internal format that a field's data  
> is stored
> in, as long as we can get at it by properties.

If it is just internal than I don't think I care.

> For the record, I'm pretty certain that isn't Utah RLE, but a very  
> very very
> much simpler format.  Take a look at it and see.

How can I if it is internal?  Or do you mean Utah?  Yeah, if Utah was  
simple, I would have just run the experiment.

> But I still wish someone
> would explain to me why so many people seem to care?

I can guess.  Well, there are problems in getting the size and  
imageData right at the same time.  Also, I'm told it is based, not on  
the image, but on the display of the image.  I think the size and  
angle might affect it.  Also, Chipp has found that it is not the same  
platform to platform, that it seems be a collection of some rendering  
values.  My experiments show that PNG gamma affects the imageData  
values.  It has problems with a newly drawn image.  It doesn't  
collect size and pixels including alpha all in one place.  It doesn't  
have room for comments (I think the unused bytes in imageData become  
zeros or did at one time).  Maybe it would be less of a draw if  
imageData worked as expected.

Dar