forums

TNT Basic Forums > Bugs!
Images in memory
< Last Thread     Next Thread >
Author
Thread        Post A Reply

03-30-2003 01:09

Posted by:
matteo

Location:
Venice, ITALY!

Click Here to Email matteo   Find more posts by matteo

I noticed that if you load a lot (say 25) of big images (say 500*150), you arrive to a point wher if you load just an image more the program loses a lot of speed (say from 30 fps to 17fps).
I' m in hardware mode on mac os 9.2.2 on iMac. I have a lot of RAM (320 MB), but this does not seem to help.
I don' t know if this is a TNT fault.

03-30-2003 14:07

Posted by:
someone

Location:
Quebec ( Canada )

Click Here to Email someone   Find more posts by someone

I don't really know the solution of your problem, but I have a few ideas.

1- Did you allocate more memory to Hieroglyph and TNT ?
2- Can you load less images at the same time?
3- Do you have lots of memory but little processor speed?
4- Did you try or can you gif compress your images?

03-30-2003 15:15

Posted by:
matteo

Location:
Venice, ITALY!

Click Here to Email matteo   Find more posts by matteo

1) yes
2) Yes, I can do that actually, loading and unloading different banks. It' s just a bit annoying..
3) 350 Mhz...
4) I think anyway TNT must decompress images before he uses them

So, the solution is actually loading and unloading different banks. Just wanted to know if it' s normal that, if you have too much stuff, TNT gets much slower...

Anybody had to load and unload different banks?

Cheers

Matteo

PS: Hey, Mathew, you copied my name!

03-30-2003 22:57

Posted by:
Machi

Click Here to Email Machi   Find more posts by Machi

Hi - just a short note.

Regardless of the fact that it is supported, you really don't want to use gif if you can avoid it. Because it is essentially an archaic format (or what IT consultants call a legacy format) that only supports 256 colours and isn't especially space efficient.

Our old favourite jpeg or even pict with quicktime jpeg compression is generally a better way to go. Because I've been concerned with load times - rather than execution speeds - and the size of resource, I've done a little experimenting. The most performance and space efficient format - possibly because it is the only Apple native format - is pict with compression. However, I have found a bug, which may be either a Quicktime backward compatibility issue or an actual TNT bug, with pict files - so for the moment I'm sticking with jpeg.

Another tip that was handed on to me and has stood me in good stead is to convert the colour depth of the image to "thousands" before importing it into TNT. The program that I use for this and for compression is GraphicConverter - available as shareware.

Good luck,
Mark Mancq,
Machisoft

03-31-2003 10:50

Posted by:
matteo

Location:
Venice, ITALY!

Click Here to Email matteo   Find more posts by matteo

for some random reason I happen to use TIFF...
Is that ok?

03-31-2003 12:00

Posted by:
Machi

Click Here to Email Machi   Find more posts by Machi

TIFF is also an older format, but still okay for most images, but file sizes, and therefore the size of your TNT program, will be much larger (3+ times larger) than jpeg.

Because TNT uses Quicktime, there are a large range of formats that are supported, but some are definitely better than others.

I'm no graphics expert, and it would be useful to have some input on this forum from someone who is, but as I mentioned earlier, I have been experimenting a lot to try and get the optimal image quality, file size and execution time balance.

I'm interested in other people's findings.

Regards,
Mark

All times are GMT        Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
< Last Thread     Next Thread >

< Contact Us - TNT Basic >

Powered by: vBulletin Lite Version 1.0.1 Lite
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Limited 2000.