CompuServe Thread

#1280×1280 24Bit

25 messages in this thread
#23582From: Scott BesselNov 20, 1992 8:20 PM
I am looking for information on how to view and edit a 24 bit 1280×1280 picture on the Amiga. What will I need to do this and is anyone doing this now? – I need to be able to see and edit the ENTIRE picture on the screen. It looks like the new Visinoa board might be able to do this? Thanks .>Scott: <AutoPilot:
#23601From: Black Belt SystemsNov 21, 1992 3:11 PM
You can do this with Imagemaster, a product from our company. Imagemaster can operate in entire-image-on-screen mode, or pix for pixel modes. In a stock Amiga, astounding display quality can be had. Add-on display boards are also supported. Imagemaster has the most 24-bit picture editing capability of any Amiga software product. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#23608From: Scott BesselNov 21, 1992 8:17 PM
I want to be able to view AND modify pixel by pixel of the image on the screen, as far as I knew the stock Amiga cannot do this. What I guess I was asking was what hardware/software combination would I need to do this effectively? .>Scott: <AutoPilot:
#23619From: Black Belt SystemsNov 22, 1992 2:48 AM
The Amiga CAN do it, using Imagemaster. Surprise! <grin> –Ben …via AutoPilot
#23645From: Scott BesselNov 22, 1992 6:32 PM
It can?? – I need to be able to SEE the entire image at the same time, that means my display has to be able to take the 1280×1280 right?? .>Scott: <AutoPilot:
#23646From: Black Belt SystemsNov 22, 1992 6:51 PM
Nope. :^) Imagemaster can scale any image into a full screen, and you can work on it that way – we call that "entire image" mode. Then we have "exact image" mode, where each pixel of your image is 1:1 with screen pixels, and you scroll the display to cover the part you want. There is a third option, where you can cut out a "piece" of an image into what is essentially an isolated NEW image, work on it (either way, exact or entire) and then if the results are as you like, you "restore" that subimage into the one you cut it out of – a simple operation; all cut out buffers know where they came from. Imagemaster operates this way: Lets say you have a 1280×1280 image, and it's scaled into the display in entire image mode. Since you have it in 640×400, for instance, you're not seeing every pixel – but you're seeing most of it. Now, say you want to do something, oh, increase the contrast, of a freehand region. First, you mark the are you want to affect. Then, Imagemaster scales that marking back to the size of the original – 1280×1280 – and applies the operation (contrast in this case) to the original in the exact area you marked. Then, the (new) results are updated to the Amiga display, again scaled to entire image mode. It sounds like a lot, but in practice, it's simple, requires little or no thought from you, and works very, very well. If, in the future, you were to get a high-color display board, there are many that Imagemaster supports, and our support will be improving substantially in the future. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#23674From: Scott BesselNov 23, 1992 9:36 PM
O.K. Sounds great. What I am trying to do is replace MAC II's that are doing this with PhotoShop. Currently we use a Kodak Negative scanner and read the images and modify them to be printed later. We currently have 6 of these stations in our local branch but they run in upwards of $30,000 and I figure we can do the same thing with the Amiga. Maybe my question would be better asked like this: If you had $6,000 to make the ultimate 24 bit graphics workstation, what would you get? .>Scott: <AutoPilot:
#23681From: Black Belt SystemsNov 24, 1992 12:09 AM
Meaning, ultimate as in Amiga? Easy: Hardware: ——— An Amiga 4000, with 18mb of ram (CBM); an extra (laaaarge) IDE hard drive (the 4000 comes with a 120mb, which is minimal for your needs). The 4000 has gfx which are more than good enough to deal with any 24-bit image imaginable, when driven by Imagemaster. Your choice of scanner hardware – check with ASDG for availability of drivers for your input device, first, though, for AdPro2. Software: ——— Imagemaster for image manipulation (from Black Belt Systems); AdPro2 for driving high quality scanner devices and talking to Mac file formats (from ASDG); GigaMem virtual memory software for those whopping big images (from Innovatronics); PageStream desktop publishing software for proofs and etc. (from SoftLogic). Later: —— Add one (or more) 64 mb memory cards from Progressive Peripherals… unless something bigger and better becomes available. As I'm sure you know, there's no such thing as too much memory, and as you may or may not know, you can stuff an Amiga to 2 gigs if you can find the hardware – the bus isn't the limitation, it's the memory technology. That oughta do you, but good. :^) –Ben …via AutoPilot
#23714From: Kermit WoodallNov 25, 1992 3:54 PM
Scott, get an Amiga 4000 with either a large IDE drive, at least 240mb if not larger (get a SCSI II interface and drive if they're out by the time you start working on this), the VIVID-24 display board from DMI or anything similar resolution-wise for a preview of your output – this is purely optional, and get ImageFX from GVP for handling all the image processing, prepress, scanning and file input and output needs for this. For a scanner, get the Epson ES300c. ImageFX will control and drive all of this and has everything in one neat package for you. Kermit Woodall Nova Design, Inc.
#23764From: Carl HansenNov 27, 1992 8:56 PM
Kermit- I've got exactly the same problem as Scott at work. We have an Electronic Imaging Lab which is a network of MACII's and PC's. I have been trying to get Amigas incorporated in the lab for the last year. Commodore representatives paid us a visit and have provided us with an A3000 for testing purposes but I have yet to find software for the Amiga that does the day-to-day, hour-after-hour image processing we do as slickly as PhotoShop. ImageMaster doesn't even import the JPEG images we are using on the network. The software we need will do simple spotting, cropping, color correction etc. on photographic images we have scanned using our Nikon or Epson scanners. Right now MACs and PhotoShop are doing a super job for us and the only incentive to include Amigas would be if the machines were less expensive and the software as easy to use. After saying all that can you tell me what ImageFX does in this line? Is it's interface useable/intuitive? I sure hope so because with PhotoCD and digital line photography is following it would be nice if the Amiga found a second nitch. If you are interested in seeing the types of photography we are doing and have access to InterNet you can download images at Photo1 or here on CIS in the Graphics Gallery where we have a couple of libraries. The CIS images are GIF the Internet images JPEG. They just reorganized the libraries there and I haven't visited recently but they are listed as Smithsonian1 and Smithsonian2, I think. Is ImageFX related to the DeskTop Darkroom I saw mentioned in GVP's most recent ads? Just wanted to get my two bits in here and ask a couple of questions I have had since seeing your posting. Thanks, Carl
#23767From: Carl HansenNov 27, 1992 9:29 PM
I hate writing on line it makes me seem even dumber than I am! :^) Anyway in my last message I tried to guide you to our libraries here on CIS and missed. I just went and checked – we now have five libraries online. Go Gallery and they are libraries 3-7. I think the more complete internet address is Photo1@SIVM.edu but again I'm not sure since I don't go there and it has only been online for a month or so. Thanks for your patience. Carl
#23791From: Black Belt SystemsNov 28, 1992 3:14 PM
Mac JPEG images, like most Mac files, have extra data prepended to the files by the Mac OS. That data needs to be removed – there are various utilities available on the Amiga to do that job. We may, at some point, provide automatic stripping of the useless data that the Mac OS adds on, though; hard to say, there's been very little call for that type of thing. FYI. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#23793From: SyndesisNov 28, 1992 6:45 PM
Ben, if I send you my code for detecting and skipping the 128 byte header of MacBinary files, will you quit complaining and add it to all your loaders? 🙂
#23815From: Carl HansenNov 29, 1992 2:20 PM
Ben- I appreciate your response but since the Mac way of writing JPEG images is the default in my industry (photography/printing) any software that is to be considered of "professional" quality must work with the Mac format – seamlessly. I have attempted stripping the "useless" info from the front of the Mac format without succcess. But really it doesn't make any difference. It was just an exercise for my own curiousity – I wanted to see how fast your program would de-compress the images and how they would look. I am still looking for Amiga programs that will work – ones I can show my co-workers without embarrassment. Carl
#24050From: Joe FlanaganDec 4, 1992 4:28 PM
Just FYI its called a resource fork (the actual file itself is called the data fork)…. And its pretty standard so there should be an easy way to make one program that will pull the resource fork off any mac file (gif/jpeg/word/etc)…. America Online provides such a utility called AOMAC2PC.EXE boring name but it does the job… There should be a similar utility for the amiga…. Joe Flanagan A&a Printers
#23799From: Kermit WoodallNov 28, 1992 9:14 PM
Carl…I'll get those jpegs from Internet…no problem. ImageFX is completely unrelated to "Desktop Darkroom", although the ads for that would make you think it might have similar features. Our interface is highly intuitive, has built-in AmigaGuide help for most all features in a context sensitive fashion…we're quite similar to the Mac's Photoshop in our overall features and approach, with an Amiga motif for the interface. GVP can send you more info, but your local dealer probably has ImageFX in stock now. It's been shipping fast and furiously for some weeks now. Kermit Woodall Nova Design, Inc.
#23816From: Carl HansenNov 29, 1992 2:34 PM
Kermit, I think you will be impressed – please let me know one way or another. The Smithsonian Institution just joined Internet and our server is the first online. Apple Computer gave us a grant of equipment so that our images could be available in the JPEG format. We are also distributing our images electronically via National Digital software/hardware. We are very pleased with the reproduction of our images transmitted via JPEG despite it's "looseyness". I keep preaching to the Amiga developers that there is a fantastic market out there, right now – not next year, for "Electronic Darkroom" software. Mayby there is now some hope, I certainly hope so. The Amiga seems to be the perfect platform but all the software I have been able to test is aimed at other markets (art/animation/morphing etc.)not mine. Additionally the software is too slow on screen redraws compared to the Mac, something that I just can't understand. Thanks for listening, Carl
#23837From: Paul ToalNov 29, 1992 11:33 PM
This is the third program I've seen with AmigaGuide, how do you read these files. –Paul –Paul
#23851From: Matthew J. W. RatcliffNov 30, 1992 5:30 PM
Why didn't you or Lee let me know it ws shipping? I haven't even seen this gem of a program yet?
#23720From: Joe FlanaganNov 25, 1992 10:32 PM
Go with the mac.. the 24bit amiga arena is not mature enough for you type of setting… and you CERTAINLY do not want to use the base amiga (even with the new AGA chips) to edit 1280×1280 24bit images…. The mac software is more powerful and the hardware is more supported. Trying to use an amiga to do this will only give you more headaches and less support…. For the same amount of money…. I.E. you have a developer here saying that you can edit said pictures on the amiga in "full image" mode at 640×400 and not lose "much" of the picture… Last time i checked 640×400 will give you 1/4 of a 1280×1280 image.. As such their "full image mode" strips out 75% of the pixels in your image in an attempt to display the "full image" in "full image" mode…. That is *NOT* going to be acceptable for your needs. If you find and add a display card to an amiga that supports 1280×1280 you'll be locked into the 1 or 2 software programs that support the card.. whereas on the mac everything works on the display including the operating system. I like the amiga very much but there are some things best left to macs (at least for now). Joe Flanagan A&a Printers
#23736From: Kermit WoodallNov 26, 1992 11:57 AM
Joe, of course I'm thoroughly biased, but we think ImageFX brings the power of Mac/PC image editing programs to the Amiga and then some. We've been told by unbiased observers that much of our software is faster and easier to use than the other platforms. Further, to edit a 1280×1280 image in our system does not require a display card capable of 1280×1280 resolution…ImageFX, like similar software, scales the image preview to fit even a stock Amiga screen and maintains the full 24-bit buffer. ImageFX's requirements are 1/2mb chip ram and 3mb fast ram. We actually have had users use our virtual memory and run in only 1mb of ram total, but that's not our recommended configuration since we find that some operations needed more than 1mb of ram total. Don't write the Amiga platform off…try not only our software, but all the latest software and see if you really think the Amiga can't do this. Kermit Woodall Nova Design, Inc.
#23870From: Joe FlanaganNov 30, 1992 10:05 PM
I'll never write the amiga off… And I never said it couldn't handle it.. The point is that this guy was obviously doing professional work and you were trying to steer him towards a kludge kinda program for his needs.. He was obvious in stating that he needed to work on the WHOLE 1280×1280 image at one time and you were confusing him with terms like "full image mode" and saying he could do what he wanted with the amiga's built in video… I know the amiga is a great machine but there are some things its just NOT the best for…. Some guy at home that wants to play with big pictures… ok fine your program is great…. Proffesionals that can't afford a $1-$2k video card, then your program is great… But you have to recognize that many business users HAVE to have the hardware/software regardless of cost… And I think that the only reason your software seems faster is because 99% of the time its working on smaller images. Photoshop on the mac is slow by a lot of standards, but you won't find any other program that has all its features. We edit 50meg files daily on a 33mhz 040 based Quadra 950…. Expensive, but to try and do that on an amiga would be crazy…. You'ld waste expensive man hours setting it up, translating output etc etc etc… Overall the amiga is my favorite computer… But I had to jump in there and save this guy from an expensive mistake because the two of you kind of had a communications break-down or something…. Now, forgetting about that, does your software support the AGA chips?? Joe Flanagan A&a Printers
#23900From: Black Belt SystemsDec 1, 1992 11:09 AM
Joe, it was me you were responding to, not Kermit. I was not "confusing him" with terms like "full image mode". I was telling him the exact truth, and describing it concisely. I'll describe it in any greater amount of detail if called upon to do so either by direct questions or if I feel that the situation seems to warrant it. You, on the other hand, have a "nailed-to-the-wall" position on what you think you "must" have to get a particular job done; and in _fact_, you are wrong when you apply that to others (and probably for yourself as well, from what I see you saying here). It is fine that you accept this position for yourself, and spend the extra money required to satisfy your arbitrary and unsupportable position, but to say that your view of how things must be is the only accurate view is as bad as any other arbitrary viewpoint. It is a FACT than many, perhaps most, "professional" applications can use software such as Imagemaster to get various jobs done. Further, it is a FACT that many jobs canNOT be done using PhotoShop, yet CAN be doene using Imagemaster. Those two facts, standing by themselves, punch more holes in your PhotoShop arguments than are needed to justify my position. Imagemaster allows you to work on the whole 1280×1280 image at one time. And, Imagemaster also allows you to SEE the entire image thru a subsampling method, or part of it pixel for pixel by scrolling. This in fact is enough to do any type of operation you need to do; it may require some checking to make sure you've not done anything untoward to parts of the image that are not visible (due to the subsampling, if you're using that) but it's a certainly doable. It is also a fact that an image processed by Imagemaster and saved using a nondestructive method will be of much higher quality than an image processed by anything you care to name and saved using JPEG. It totally amazes me that you can stand over on one side and hop up and down about accuracy and precision and then you trample your images with one of the <continued>
#23901From: Black Belt SystemsDec 1, 1992 11:10 AM
most destructive save methods known to computing – JPEG. Do I know anything about this? Nah… – I just wrote the JPEG implementation for our company, and designed the custom nondestructive 24-bit savers, that's all. :^) Your implications that the Amiga is not suitable for image manipulation work are unsupportable and just plain wrong. You say that "you won't find any other program" that has PhotoShop's features; well, in fact, Photoshop doesn't have anywhere near the number of features that Imagemaster has. As many of our users will happily attest to. I can tell you I don't lose any sleep worrying if it ever will catch up, either. Imagemaster appears faster than PhotoShop for only one reason – and that is simply that it IS faster. Not that we ever tried to make it faster, it's just the VMEM techniques used by PhotoShop hamstring it badly for speed. Imagemaster slows down a lot if you choke it with VMEM also (though not as much as PhotoShop). You point about converting file types is moot; that's a trival process that can be completely automated for bunches of files, should the need arise, you're making far too much out of it. Editing 50 meg files with Imagemaster is easy and reasonable to do, assuming only that you either have the memory or the HD space to do it. Using the HD is of course an amatuer way to do it, acceptable, but slower. And finally, yes, Imagemaster supports the AGA chipset directly. It was the first Amiga program released with direct AGA editing and operations, (as compared to just viewing images in AGA) in fact. You can work and edit using 1280 wide screens, in either the 256 color or the 18 bit modes, no problem. Also 8-bit B&W, if that's your bag. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#23907From: Kermit WoodallDec 1, 1992 11:48 AM
JF>The point is that this guy was obviously doing professional JF>work and you were trying to steer him towards a kludge kinda JF>program for his needs.. Joe…here's Scott's original post…he didn't say what he's doing his work for, but he does say he wants to do it on the Amiga. Not the Mac or PC. > I am looking for information on how to view and edit a 24 >bit 1280×1280 picture on the Amiga. What will I need to do >this and is anyone doing this now? – I need to be able to see >and edit the ENTIRE picture on the screen. It looks like the >new Visiona board might be able to do this? Scott later qualifies this asking about the best hardware/software platform…again, he still seems to be asking about the available Amiga hardware and software. We created our program for exactly the type of work he asked about. We looked carefully at highend image processing and editing systems on both the MAC and PC and created a package for the Amiga that addressed these same needs. JF>He was obvious in stating that he needed to work on the WHOLE JF>1280×1280 image at one time and you were confusing him with JF>terms like "full image mode" and saying he could do what he JF>wanted with the amiga's built in video… You CAN work on a 1280×1280 image, and on the whole image, at one time in our software. You can use the Amiga's display to preview it as you work on it as well. JF>I think that the only reason your software seems faster is JF>because 99% of the time its working on smaller images. JF>Photoshop on the mac is slow by a lot of standards, but you JF>won't find any other program that has all its features. Nope. Our software is faster in many respects, when working on the exact same images under the same (relative) conditions, is due to several factors. One – the Amiga's processor isn't maintaining the video, audio, or other features and has more cpu cycles available for the program, Two – where appropriate we take advantage of things like the blitter to speed up some operations, Three – we simply have better "virtual memory" for managing and editing images from the disk.