Re: Netscape worse........

At 09:44 AM 12/1/97 -0500, Tori wrote:
>Ulf Pettersson wrote:
>
>> > One small tip: When designing
>> > graphics, always set your monitor at 256, and do the best you can with
that, so
>> > all of your viewers will be satisfied...
>>
>> This will not work. You will sometimes have almost no idea of how
>> your graphics really look and that will make it look like crap.
>> Work with 24-bits, nothing else, when designing graphics.
>>
>> But do, by all means, check how the graphics look in
>> 256-colors, when they are finished!
>
>Everyone has its own techniques, but if you design on 16 or 24 bit, and
then you go
>back and view that with the monitor set at 256 colors... YOU ARE GOING TO
GET A MESSY
>GRAPHIC, and not vice versa...

well, to argue this point, i don't design only for 640x480 screens, as i
know that certain things can happen if someone with a 1280x1024 res comes
to my page.  

I've seen graphics that were created with 8-bit settings, but since the
image files themselves are potentially 24-bit information, there's a good
chance that the designer doesn't see what the actual results are, if he's
only using 256 colours.

Eg:  what you may see as one or two shades of blue when designing at
256colours may in reality be any number of shades, consider an image like
this:
http://www.myna.com/~tempest/list/list-example01.jpg
and you can see briefly what i mean.

same thing.. i define colours that i know will either dither or translate
to the closest match on a 256-colour display, but you will check how it
looks, and think it's one colour when it comes out to be another...

this is especially 'dangerous' when dealing with scanning issues and moire
effects.

Green

[ New personal site at http://www.myna.com/~tempest/green/ ]

HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA