[A83] Re: ZPic83 compression

To: <assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>
Subject: [A83] Re: ZPic83 compression
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jens_Bj=F6rnhager?= <jensbj@home.se>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:20:59 -0700
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020610104230.009f9cc0@mail.bellsouth.net> <001301c21116$86df5090$021a450a@mindcooler> <004301c210d4$76d6e060$838d86cb@l3o6v0>
Reply-To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org


> Writing both is a good idea to check sizes.  but a vertical one would also
> be much larger..

I don't see why thay would be..

> I mean in the end that your 5 bits is compressed into 3, only saving 2.  I
> was thinking of trying to merge the special byte and the run length byte
> somehow but im pretty sure thats useless..

Actually, my five bits is "compressed" into 8.

> Only problem with this way is that, for random pictures (ones with no
runs),
> it would increase the size of thje picture

That's right. PCX uses a kind of "special byte" (more than one), and it
saves space
compared to a simpler kind of RLE algorithm.

/Jens

Follow-Ups:

[A83] Re: ZPic83 compression

From: "Ronald Teune" <rtwolf@gmx.net>

References:

[A83] Re: ZPic83 compression

From: Charlie Adams <charlieadams@bellsouth.net>

[A83] Re: ZPic83 compression

From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jens_Bj=F6rnhager?= <jensbj@home.se>

[A83] Re: ZPic83 compression

From: "Nat Allan" <nallan@hotkey.net.au>