From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29121 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2004 02:57:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29109 invoked from network); 10 Aug 2004 02:57:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sccrmhc13.comcast.net) (204.127.202.64) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Aug 2004 02:57:18 -0000 Received: from [192.168.181.128] (c-67-172-156-222.client.comcast.net[67.172.156.222]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with ESMTP id <2004081002571801600ql9nve>; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:57:18 +0000 Message-ID: <41183980.9080209@phy.cmich.edu> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:22:00 -0000 From: Eric McDonald User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (Windows/20040626) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hans Ronne CC: xconq7@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: IMFApp Office References: <200408051452.i75Eqlg06099@panix5.panix.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00855.txt.bz2 Hans Ronne wrote: > Strange. I don't see any black patches under either Mac OS or Linux/X11. > The only thing I see is the failure to scale the images correctly on the > first attempt. I am defnitely significant patchy black regions surrounding the images when they are initially drawn with incorrect scaling in the 32x32 bounding boxes on the display grid. >>I saw the 44x48 images, and assumed that Xconq would scale the images >>based on that. The reason I chose a height of 64 is so that it would fit >>the largest view size without having to be scaled back up from 32x32. > > That's a nice idea. Thanks. >Images at 64x64 are generally so ugly that I never use > that magnification. Well, my idea is to have Wreckreation actually look decent at that magnification. Last time, I was at that view power (probably about half a year ago), I thought I saw connector drawing problems (maybe with the Standard game). I will have to recheck that. >And it seems that scaling of your images works, after > some initial confusion, both at 32x32 and 64x64. I wish there was a 44x44 view in IMFApp for the special big images. I tried doing view "Selected as Terrain", but all that did was make a hex pattern with the image inside each hex on the display grid. It did nothing to the closeup views. Also, the other images in the IMF file were still superimposed on top of the display grid, even though it was now a hex pattern instead of invisible rectangles. Eric