CompuServe Thread

#TAD

6 messages in this thread
#16830From: Jim MariasMay 17, 1990 10:30 PM
Hi Perry, My TAD arrived today !!! Yippeee! You've done some real nice work with this. I'm very impressed with the speed of the renderings and the ease of use. In my experimenting, I have run into one problem. My intention is to convert a 320 x 400 ham image to ARES (ARZ0). I loaded the ham image and it created the 24 bit map. Set for ARZ0 set screen control to Hi Res Hit execute TAD rendered the image after a few minutes. The resulting pic has a screen thats 640 x 400, but the image is 320 x 400 (Fills left half of screen). The image size indicator says 320 x 400. Go to scaling Enlarge width by 100%. result 640 Hit accept Hit Execute. OOOPS! message (I like that) Image too large after scaling Should I not get a 640 x 400 image ? I tried several times but no go. Any hints would be much appreciated ! Jim Marias (75436,126)
#16831From: ASDGMay 17, 1990 10:59 PM
To make the picture look the same when converting a LOW-RES image to HI-RES, you need to enlarge only the WIDTH (specifically LOW-RES/INTERLACE to HI-RES/INTERLACE). But, you may not have enough RAM for the 24 bit data after the enlargement. That image would require 640 X 400 X 30 / 8 BYTES of contiguous fast ram. pk
#16841From: Jim MariasMay 18, 1990 11:37 AM
Perry, Thanks for the quick reply ! It turned out to be a lack of memory problem. When I got rid of rad: and single tasked TAD, everything worked as expected. Again, my compliments. TAD is so fast, even on a 68000, experimenting and optimizing is actually fun, instead of a time consuming chore. Thanks, Jim Marias (75436,126)
#16849From: ASDGMay 18, 1990 7:36 PM
Thanks much for the kind words. A lot of time was spent on TAD to create an entirely floating point free environment. All operations in TAD use integer math (except for one place where we do some bezier curve stuff but that isn't related to rendering). This was exceptionally tough for some operations like scaling which require fractional precision. But, the proof is in the pudding. TAD's speed makes millions of calculations bearable even on a 68000, as you say. pk
#16845From: Harry CallesisMay 18, 1990 5:48 PM
ASDG – I usually work with an interlaced WB. When I tried running TAD from there with nothing else running, it gave "not enough memory". Is TAD so chip-hungry it needs to run from low-res? It's a bit of a pain to have to reboot into low-res to run it (I'm running from HD). My total RAM is 9 MB, with 1 MB chip. Other than the WB problem, the program is fantastic. I'm still playing with it to see what all it can do! Thanks … Harry
#16850From: ASDGMay 18, 1990 7:39 PM
Our development environment is identical to the machine you describe. That is, 8 meg fast, 1 meg chip. Interlaced/Hi-Res WorkBench. We run TAD (and a lot of other things which use CHIP memory) all the time. There must be something else which is present in CHIP ram to prevent you from running TAD in that case. Do you addbuffers a large amount of floppy cache? Are you sure your hard disk buffers are not coming out of CHIP ram? Is CHIP ram fragmented at the time you tried to run TAD? Try doing an AVAIL immediately before running tad, note the results, and if TAD doesn't load, please post the results from AVAIL. I'll check it out. pk