Hi Leif, ... > Basically, we are traveling through each pixel of the image and adding > the chars to the string. I tried using: > > data = data & chr(col.red) & chr(col.green) & chr(col.blue) > > since using "put" seemed too old school, even for and old man like me. > But I got the same results.
AFAIK, it's the other way round, put ..after... is sometimes faster than concatenating with the newer syntax. But what makes the addImg method VERY SLOW is the pixel-wise sampling with getPixel. AddImg is only meant for very small images that are dynamically created with lingo. In all other cases you should definetely use external image files and either AddPng() or AddJpg(). If your images are dynamically created, use some freeware image export xtra (e.g. sharp) to export them first and then use the mentioned methods. Valentin > So, I tried saving that huge-ass string in a file using FileIO then > reading the file string in instead of prcessing the graphic. That > resulted in Acrobat saying it didn't have enough information to show > that graphic (or as we say here, Acrobat gave me "the finger", so I > obviously did something wrong). > > Can anyone give me some insight here? Work-arounds and/or hacks gladly > taken under consideration. Thanks! > > Leif > > Leif Wells > Atlanta Macromedia User Group Manager > [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go > to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, > email lingo-l@penworks.com (Problems, email > [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with > programming Lingo. Thanks!] [To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email lingo-l@penworks.com (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
