Re: Re: Re: Why is the imagedata value different from Win32 to MacOS platforms?

2006-07-25 Thread Chipp Walters
Malte, Thanks for testing. It sounds like using high quality JPEG files is still the way to go. best, Chipp On 7/25/06, Malte Brill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I tested it again and it seems it doesn´t work. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revol

Re: Re: Re: Why is the imagedata value different from Win32 to MacOS platforms?

2006-07-25 Thread Malte Brill
Hi Chipp, I tested it again and it seems it doesn´t work. Seems I have a screwed up memory at the moment. I know I had it working when exporting from my OS 9 machine which is dead now I´m afraid. I recall that I had a jpeg with embedded color profile in the back instead of a card backgrou

Re: Re: Why is the imagedata value different from Win32 to MacOS platforms?

2006-07-25 Thread Chipp Walters
Hi Malte, I did download and try SuperPNG (turns out it's FREE), but could not get it to create the correct gamma settings. Can you share your secret? Thx, Chipp ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to s

Re: Re: Why is the imagedata value different from Win32 to MacOS platforms?

2006-07-25 Thread Chipp Walters
Malte, Are you saying when using this plugin, there is no difference between PNG files (gamma-wise) between platforms? If that's true, then you are wonderful!!! (Even if it's not true, you're still wonderful ;-) Could you possibly post a stack which would demonstrate this? Here's what I would s

Re: Re: Why is the imagedata value different from Win32 to MacOS platforms?

2006-07-25 Thread Malte Brill
Chipp wrote: If you don't need the alpha channel of PNGs, I suggest always using JPGs. And if you need the alpha channel and work with a graphic app that can use Photoshop plugins try superpng, which can embed the correct gamma settings into the png files. I used to work with it a lot and