Re: New Image Features
Ben Rubinstein ecrivait / wrote: >Following summary adapted from Apple's QuickDraw documentation: Thanx, that's complete :-) But, you had better to insert html links between <> (care to RC that break URLs!) -- (-8 domi Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features (Digest...)
>andu wrote: >> >> This idea >> that the language should be easily understood (with no effort at all) by >> "the average person" aka "us" is total crap. > >I heard this same retort ten years ago from a rabid DOS user who sneered >at anyone who used a GUI. That doesn't have any relevance to the point being made. If a rabid DOS user says that 2+2 is 4, that doesn't make it 5. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Andu's point, just that your rebuttal doesn't address the point being made. That said, we should still try to to come to a consensus on language issues, in order to keep the language as useful as possible. Regards, Geoff Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
on 22/5/01 7:38 PM, Dominique at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Geoff Canyon ecrivait / wrote: > >> I think of Bic pens. What the heck _does_ it stand for? > > Black Is Changed > Following summary adapted from Apple's QuickDraw documentation: Action on destination pixel If source pixel If source pixel Source mode is blackis white --- --- --- srcCopy Force black Force white notSrcCopy Force white Force black srcOr Force black Leave alone notSrcOrLeave alone Force black srcXor Invert Leave alone notSrcXor Leave alone Invert srcBic Force white Leave alone notSrcBic Leave alone Force white The COPY operation (srcCopy) completely replaces the pixels in the destination bitmap with the pixels in the source bitmap. The inverse COPY operation (notSrcCopy) completely replaces the pixels in the destination bitmap with a "photographic negative" of the source bitmap. The OR operation (srcOr) adds the black pixels from the source bitmap to the destination bitmap. The inverse OR operation (notSrcOr) takes a "photographic negative" of the source bitmap, and then adds the black pixels from this negative to the destination bitmap. The XOR operation (srcXor) inverts the pixels in the destination bitmap that correspond to black pixels in the source bitmap. The inverse XOR operation (notSrcXor) inverts the pixels in the destination bitmap that correspond to white pixels in the source bitmap. The BIC operations (srcBic modes) turns pixels in the destination bitmap white when they correspond to black pixels in the source bitmap. The inverse BIC operation (notSrcBic) turns pixels in the destination bitmap white when they correspond to white pixels in the source bitmap. NB: these are the modes as they apply to black-and-white source and destination. For colour, things are a little more complex - and the interpration less consistent between platforms. See Apple's documentation at http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/mac/QuickDraw/QuickDraw-199.html#HEADING 199-76 and for the 'arithmetic transfer modes' (including "blend" and "transparent") http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/mac/QuickDraw/QuickDraw-199.html#MARKER- 9-141 I have to say that I agree with Andu: for some things you have to learn about the domain and the concepts, and there are names that go with those concepts. I know nothing about music; if I want MetaCard to play some notes (can it? let say HyperCard), I imagine I'm going to have learn about some new concepts, and the names associated with them. Ben Rubinstein | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cognitive Applications Ltd | Phone: +44 (0)1273-821600 http://www.cogapp.com| Fax : +44 (0)1273-728866 Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features (Digest...)
Jacqueline Landman Gay wrote: > > andu wrote: > > > > This idea > > that the language should be easily understood (with no effort at all) by > > "the average person" aka "us" is total crap. > > I heard this same retort ten years ago from a rabid DOS user who sneered > at anyone who used a GUI. Really? Is my English so bad? > > -- > Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596 > Custom hypermedia solutions| http://www.hyperactivesw.com > Andu Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features (Digest...)
andu wrote: > > This idea > that the language should be easily understood (with no effort at all) by > "the average person" aka "us" is total crap. I heard this same retort ten years ago from a rabid DOS user who sneered at anyone who used a GUI. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596 Custom hypermedia solutions| http://www.hyperactivesw.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features (Digest...)
This discussion is degenerating into "whom should we choose to design the metatalk language since Metacard does such a lousy job". This idea that the language should be easily understood (with no effort at all) by "the average person" aka "us" is total crap. The average person uses a computer for email and shopping (if at all) not programing, those who "need" to develop applications even at a minimal level are not exactly average since they acquire knowledge the average person does not even dream about. Also this "us" thing is most inaccurate: Scott Rossi knows a lot more about multimedia/graphics then I do, I probably know more about other things then he does (his technical vocabulary is different than mine). The only "us" here is that we both use Metacard, not necessarily the same set of features. I followed similar discussions on the xTalk list and there are as many opinions as members on the list - no one is "average". Ultimately users (developers) will have to learn to associate a name with a concept even if it "doesn't sound English" enough for them for the simple reason that English language is struggling itself to keep up with zillion new concepts and ideas that need new names every day. Funny thing is that I never heard this sort of complains about metatalk from the international crowd (well, with one exception;-), I guess they don't believe in the lowest common denominator as standard for the vocabulary of a language. Andu Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Geoff Canyon ecrivait / wrote: >I think of Bic pens. What the heck _does_ it stand for? Black Is Changed don't ask more ;-) -- (-8 domi Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Geoff Canyon ecrivait / wrote: >I think of Bic pens. What the heck _does_ it stand for? Black Is Changed don't ask more ;-) -- (-8 domi Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
>Whenever I see the term "notSrcBic", for a split second I think: "A Bic >lighter should not be used to ignite this object". I think of Bic pens. What the heck _does_ it stand for? gc Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Scott Rossi wrote: > Whenever I see the term "notSrcBic", for a split second I think: "A Bic > lighter should not be used to ignite this object". Ha! That's my reaction too. :) I have used SuperCard's inks, and now MetaCard's, but most of the terms still don't make much sense to me and I always have to just click my way through the list until I get the effect I am looking for. I have looked for some sort of descriptive explanation of what each ink does but haven't found any. Even SuperCard's animated visual example didn't always make it clear to me what to expect. Would you be willing to post a short description of each type of ink and how it behaves? I would love to have the information and I am sure many others would too. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596 Custom hypermedia solutions| http://www.hyperactivesw.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Jacqueline Landman Gay wrote: > ...But the rest of us need a more common English reference > and a bit of explanation. > > Where does one draw the line? With the destroyStack property. ;) I agree with Jeanne DeVoto's reminder that programming languages serve different purposes than human languages, and we should take that into consideration while designing syntax. But here I also agree with Jacque, that where choosing between two tokens makes no difference to the computer it can make a world of difference to the human learning the language. To all but C++ programmers, "destroy" implies unrecoverable damage, to obliterate something beyond the ability to bring it back. Sounds very scary, and outside of C++ it is. In C++, "destroy" is commonly used to describe purging something from memory, but to most native English speakers it implies doing something far more serious, perhaps removing the stack from the file. C++ programmers understand "destroy" and lay people don't, but everyone understands "purge" -- why not "purgeStack" and "purgeWindow" properties? Anyone who believe newcomers don't really turn white at the thought of clicking the destroyStack checkbox in the Inspector haven't done much teaching. :) -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation Multimedia Design and Development for Mac, Windows, UNIX, and the Web _ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com Tel: 323-225-3717 ICQ#60248349Fax: 323-225-0716 Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Recently, Jacqueline Landman Gay wrote: > Where does one draw the line? I vote for syntax in common terminology > which the majority of people can understand. Avoidance of technical > jargon is important in an xtalk language. "Blend" is technical jargon > apparently familiar to graphic designers. But is "blend" really so technical? I want to "blend" this image with whatever is behind it. This doesn't sound like technical jargon to me. I think you have a stronger case against: srcCopy, notSrcAnd, noop, notSrcXor, etc etc. > "Transparency" (or even > "opacity") is self-explanatory to anyone. The same jargon occurs with > "alphaData" -- undoubtedly familiar to graphics programmers, but not so > familiar to us. I agree, but I think you might concur that alphaData is more approachable than the above terms. Whenever I see the term "notSrcBic", for a split second I think: "A Bic lighter should not be used to ignite this object". Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, Multimedia & Design Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.tactilemedia.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Scott Rossi wrote: > > Recently, Jacqueline Landman Gay wrote: > > > "Blendlevel" is a > > geeky term. Everyone knows what "transparency" means, many programs use > > it, and I'm baffled at why MetaCard doesn't use it too. > > I'd guess that the use of the term is based on the corresponding ink effect > "blend". Folks that have worked with ink effects before (Director, > SuperCard, mTropolis and others) know this term quite well. Okay, your explanation makes sense and I'll concede, if the term really is familiar to a majority of users (which I'm not sure of yet, but... okay.) But even so, the docs ought to have at least a passing reference to a more common term for the rest of us. > IMO, the imageData, maskData, and alphaData properties are much more "geeky" > (I believe you and I are still waiting for some more detailed instructions > for their use) Yes, it would be a revelation. But to play devil's advocate for a minute: imageData, maskData, and alphaData are undoubtedly self-explanatory terms to those who need to use them. But the rest of us need a more common English reference and a bit of explanation. Where does one draw the line? I vote for syntax in common terminology which the majority of people can understand. Avoidance of technical jargon is important in an xtalk language. "Blend" is technical jargon apparently familiar to graphic designers. "Transparency" (or even "opacity") is self-explanatory to anyone. The same jargon occurs with "alphaData" -- undoubtedly familiar to graphics programmers, but not so familiar to us. Is there "betaData"? ;) I like the way it sounds. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596 Custom hypermedia solutions| http://www.hyperactivesw.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Title: Re: New Image Features Scott Rossi wrote: > > Has anyone built a stack (or written out) how to take advantage of this > stuff yet? > > The imageData, maskData, and alphaData properties can be used to set > the pixels that an image object displays. The imageData is a > sequence of 32 bit binary values, with 8 bits each for red, green, > and blue. The maskData is sequence of 8 bit values, which 0 being > transparent and all other values being opaque. The alphaData > property is a sequence of 8 bit values with variable transparency > from 0 (totally transparent) to 255 (totally opaque). and Jacqueline Landman Gay: >I'd like to know too. I have an image that I would like to show at >50% >transparency sometimes and fully opaque other times. How would I do >that? Since 2.4 can manipulate images this way, a less cryptic >"transparency" property would be a handy thing to have. Try this: Create a scrollbar, starvalue=0 endvalue=100, and set its script to: Set the blendlevel of image 1 to the thumbposition of me It works fine here, the transparency
Re: New image features
>I'd like to know too. I have an image that I would like to show at 50% >transparency sometimes and fully opaque other times. How would I do >that? Since 2.4 can manipulate images this way, a less cryptic >"transparency" property would be a handy thing to have. Try something like: set the blendlevel of image 1 to 50 You can also use the blendlevel property with alphamasked images as well. If you're just going to for 50% transparency you'll find that the blend ink works for Window and Unix in 2.4. Tuviah Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Recently, Jacqueline Landman Gay wrote: > In the interests of useability: I had read the reference in the Read Me > file about blendlevel and it meant absolutely nothing to me, so I didn't > realize what it was for and promptly forgot about it. "Blendlevel" is a > geeky term. Everyone knows what "transparency" means, many programs use > it, and I'm baffled at why MetaCard doesn't use it too. I'd guess that the use of the term is based on the corresponding ink effect "blend". Folks that have worked with ink effects before (Director, SuperCard, mTropolis and others) know this term quite well. It's possible that new users may not find it immediately intuitive, but since they also need to learn about ink effects which are extremely unintuitive, perhaps this is not asking too much in terms of the existing language/features. > I'd like to see > it changed. Why use something obscure when a common term would be more > understandable and require less tech support? Or, if "blendlevel" is set > in stone, then at least use the word "transparency" in the docs so that > people can make the association. Meaningful terminology is an easy way > to avoid some of the useability criticism that MetaCard often gets, and > "blendlevel" isn't self-explanatory or memorable. You make a valid point. But one important thing to keep in mind is that the blendLevel affects *translucency* not transparency. Transparency is all or nothing: visible or not visible; translucency refers to the degree of opacity. If you really wanted to be accurate, maybe one should be able to set the "opacityLevel" or just "opacity" of a control but perhaps this gets confusing with the existing term. IMO, the imageData, maskData, and alphaData properties are much more "geeky" (I believe you and I are still waiting for some more detailed instructions for their use), and since "blendLevel" is apparently based on the existing ink effect, I would suggest this term is not out of character with what it actually affects. Regards, Scott _ Scott Rossi Tactile Media - Multimedia & Design Creative Director Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.tactilemedia.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Klaus Major wrote: > Try the new "blendlevel" property of an image > (at last we can abbr. that with img :-): > (Just replace transparency with blendlevel ;-) Thanks. It works, although it isn't dynamic. You have lock screen, hide the image, set the blendlevel, reshow the image, and unlock the screen. It would be nicer if it worked without all the manipulation. In the interests of useability: I had read the reference in the Read Me file about blendlevel and it meant absolutely nothing to me, so I didn't realize what it was for and promptly forgot about it. "Blendlevel" is a geeky term. Everyone knows what "transparency" means, many programs use it, and I'm baffled at why MetaCard doesn't use it too. I'd like to see it changed. Why use something obscure when a common term would be more understandable and require less tech support? Or, if "blendlevel" is set in stone, then at least use the word "transparency" in the docs so that people can make the association. Meaningful terminology is an easy way to avoid some of the useability criticism that MetaCard often gets, and "blendlevel" isn't self-explanatory or memorable. Scott? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596 Custom hypermedia solutions| http://www.hyperactivesw.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Hi Jaqueline, > Scott Rossi wrote: >> >> Has anyone built a stack (or written out) how to take advantage of this >> stuff yet? >> >> The imageData, maskData, and alphaData properties can be used to set >> the pixels that an image object displays. The imageData is a >> sequence of 32 bit binary values, with 8 bits each for red, green, >> and blue. The maskData is sequence of 8 bit values, which 0 being >> transparent and all other values being opaque. The alphaData >> property is a sequence of 8 bit values with variable transparency >> from 0 (totally transparent) to 255 (totally opaque). don't know anything about that. But there was a post some time ago with a tiny script, that generated a picture. Quite impressive, but i didn't get a word ;-) > I'd like to know too. I have an image that I would like to show at 50% > transparency sometimes and fully opaque other times. How would I do > that? Since 2.4 can manipulate images this way, a less cryptic > "transparency" property would be a handy thing to have. Try the new "blendlevel" property of an image (at last we can abbr. that with img :-): (Just replace transparency with blendlevel ;-) Setting it to 0 = opaque, to 100 = 100% transparent. Works extremely fine :-) Regards Klaus Major <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MetaScape GmbH P.S. Nothing to translate? :-) :-) :-) Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Scott Rossi wrote: > > Has anyone built a stack (or written out) how to take advantage of this > stuff yet? > > The imageData, maskData, and alphaData properties can be used to set > the pixels that an image object displays. The imageData is a > sequence of 32 bit binary values, with 8 bits each for red, green, > and blue. The maskData is sequence of 8 bit values, which 0 being > transparent and all other values being opaque. The alphaData > property is a sequence of 8 bit values with variable transparency > from 0 (totally transparent) to 255 (totally opaque). I'd like to know too. I have an image that I would like to show at 50% transparency sometimes and fully opaque other times. How would I do that? Since 2.4 can manipulate images this way, a less cryptic "transparency" property would be a handy thing to have. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | 612-724-1596 Custom hypermedia solutions| http://www.hyperactivesw.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
Re: New Image Features
Has anyone built a stack (or written out) how to take advantage of this stuff yet? The imageData, maskData, and alphaData properties can be used to set the pixels that an image object displays. The imageData is a sequence of 32 bit binary values, with 8 bits each for red, green, and blue. The maskData is sequence of 8 bit values, which 0 being transparent and all other values being opaque. The alphaData property is a sequence of 8 bit values with variable transparency from 0 (totally transparent) to 255 (totally opaque). Thanks & Regards, Scott Rossi Creative Director Tactile Media, Multimedia & Design Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.tactilemedia.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/metacard@lists.runrev.com/ Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
