Re: [Dvdauthor-users] submux again

[<wol...@we...>]

At Mittwoch, 25. Juni 2003, 20:33 Selva Nair wrote the following:

> On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 wol...@we... wrote:

>> definition, neither by frequency nor appearance in the file. If someone
>> likes to define most of the picture as opaque and only little portions
>> as background, one should be able to do so, I think.

> That is possible even with the current code -- simply reverse the
> color definitions in the palette. Background, pattern, emphasis etc
> are simply convenient names -- you can set the transparency and
> color of any of the 4 kinds of pixels the way you like. Also, 
> irrespective of the frequency of occurrence, if a fully transparent 
> color is present that is assigned as color 0 (background).

That's true, I didn't think about that.

The real caveats occur in the design phase. When you have two nearly
equally used colors and play around with them, you may get really
different results when submuxing it - at least the way, submux treats
color order at the moment. With your suggested change, problems might
occur, when you move around the objects or layers in your picture.

Either way, you may run into strange results in the submux output.

So, to be on the safe side, one should finish the design before
submuxing and then define the submux-palette according to one's needs.
In this regard, my suggestion on outputting the order of colors in
verbosity mode, would be even more helpful, as one doesn't have to try
out, which color submux placed on what position.

Regards
  Wolfgang

--
Geek by nature - Linux by choice