Re: LF: * Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) **

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: LF: * Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) **

To: list-fargo@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: LF: ***** Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) ******
From: "Kevin T. Huber" <khuber@MR.Net>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 05:43:27 GMT
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.95.961206115303.14763C-100000@fakse.dit.ou.dk>
References: <199612042022.PAA27529@mailnfs0.tiac.net> <Pine.SGI.3.95.961206115303.14763C-100000@fakse.dit.ou.dk>
Reply-To: list-fargo@lists.ticalc.org


They would, of course, if they were larger than 240x128, which the Sandra
Bullock pictures are.

-Kevin

Michael Wulff Nielsen writes:
 > 
 > Yeah, but even 3 pictures in greyscale should not take 30k of ram.
 > it goes like this:

Follow-Ups:

Re: LF: ***** Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) ******

From: Michael Wulff Nielsen <mal@dit.ou.dk>

References:

Re: LF: ***** Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) ******

From: Eric Gross <ericg@tiac.net>

Re: LF: ***** Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) ******

From: Michael Wulff Nielsen <mal@dit.ou.dk>

Prev: LF: new commands
Next: Re: LF: ***** Greyscale experts...READ THIS NOW (PLEASE) ******
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread