On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 14:09:53 +0000
Graeme Geldenhuys <mailingli...@geldenhuys.co.uk> wrote:
On 2016-12-08 14:01, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
That would be a 64bit per pixel image, wasting a lot of memory.
Why FPImage uses 64bit per pixel is beyond me! The original author of
FPImage clearly thought he/she saw something cool in that, but 99.99999%
of the time *nobody* needs that. It's causing more grief (and code to do
conversions) than anything else.
The 64bit is the maximum limit. I doubt the 99.99999%. Image editing
require more than 8bit per channel since decades.
And that is why we decided to use 64-bit.
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
