[A83] Re: ZPic83 compression

To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: [A83] Re: ZPic83 compression
From: "Dan Weiss" <dwedit@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 10:04:59 -0500
Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org

Pic_Z80 can do horizontal RLE and vertical RLE, but there is no really 
easily available vertical RLE decompressor.


>From: "Wouter v.d. Put" <woutput@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
>To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
>Subject: [A83] Re: ZPic83 compression
>Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:21:41 +0200
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Originating-IP: [212.115.200.100]
>Received: from hotmail.com ([65.54.236.25]) by hotmail.com with Microsoft 
>SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:21:41 -0700
>Received: from mx-1.sollentuna.net ([195.67.128.9]) by hotmail.com with 
>Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:21:18 -0700
>Received: from towerguard. (mx-1.sollentuna.net [195.67.128.9])by 
>mx-1.sollentuna.net (Postfix) with ESMTPid B957518030; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 
>16:21:44 +0200 (CEST)
>Received: with LISTAR (v1.0.0; list assembly-83); Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:21:44 
>+0200 (CEST)
>Received: from hotmail.com (f182.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.31.182])by 
>mx-1.sollentuna.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D064918028for 
><assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:21:42 +0200 (CEST)
>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; 
>Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:21:41 -0700
>Received: from 212.115.200.100 by pv1fd.pav1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Mon, 
>10 Jun 2002 14:21:41 GMT
>Delivered-To: lists.ticalc-assembly-83@mx-1.sollentuna.net
>Message-ID: <F182dDAYPwH1vF5SqsT00006154@hotmail.com>
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jun 2002 14:21:41.0536 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[2400D200:01C2108A]
>X-listar-version: Listar v1.0.0
>Sender: assembly-83-bounce@lists.ticalc.org
>Errors-To: assembly-83-bounce@lists.ticalc.org
>X-original-sender: woutput@hotmail.com
>Precedence: bulk
>X-list: assembly-83
>Return-Path: assembly-83-bounce@lists.ticalc.org
>
>
> >Theres the prob i personally see with RLE (to some extent).  To compress 
>a
> >string of chars, it has to add two bytes.  Yes, say, a horozontal line
> >would
>
>!!! You said: horizontal line, but maybe you could get a better compression
>by compressing vertical lines (for example with a pic that consists of
>vertical black and white lines)
>I think the only solution for this is trying both (vertical and horizontal)
>methods and after that comparing the size of the two files.
>
> >be compressed majorly, but a 'real' pic (a drawing) would very likley be
> >not
> >compressed much, if at all.
> >
> >Also: Special byte.  A picture can (and most likley one out there will) 
>use
> >every combonation from $00 to $FF.  Chosing any old byte is impossible,
> >unless you then convert any ocourances of your special byte in the pic to
> >[special byte], $01, [special byte]
> >
> >Did i explain that well enough?  I hope so.  That takes up more space too
> >:(
> >
> >Thats why i was interested in getting info/code on the zpic83 
>compression,
> >as it appears to be excelent at compressing pics.
> >
> >While im on the topic:  Program compression.  I heard talk about it, but
> >none seems to eventuate.  XZip is IMHO very poor.  Whats the deal?
> >
> >-Nat
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Meld je aan bij de grootste e-mailservice wereldwijd met MSN Hotmail:
>http://www.hotmail.com/nl




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx