[Kde-games-devel] Re: new KDE game: dominoes

[Troy Corbin Jr.]

On Thursday 07 November 2002 04:33 pm, Jay Glascoe wrote:
> hi,
>
> > How much space do the images take?
>
> a lot. There's three flavors: small, medium, large
> (24x48, 30x60, 36x72). Each consists of 120 images
> (a lot) which is 2 reliefs, 2 face downs, 4 direction
> arrows, and 112 domino faces (28 dominoes times 4
> rotations each).
>
> Uncompressed, each flavor takes up about 500k (I don't
> know whether this is funny or tragic... ;-)

Is each flavor just a different size, or are they actually different desi=
gns?

If it's size, you really only need the largest size you intend to support=
=2E=20
Then, when loading your graphics resources, load them into QImage and per=
form=20
a QImage::scale or QImage::smoothScale to reduce thier size.

Depending on several factors, this can be a slow process, so I wouldn't=20
recommend resizing on the fly ( ie. whenever the window is resized ).

> The good news is that I haven't made any effort at all
> to reduce their size. Obviously, there's quite a few
> things I could do. PNG compression is easy, but doesn't
> really buy me much (2483 bytes to 2482 bytes... useless)
> Color reduction is easy (mogrify -colors 16 foo.png), it
> buys a much reduced size but at the price of loss of
> image quality. Loss of image quality is okay, but I would
> at least like to ensure that the resulting image looks
> just as good at 8 bit resolution as 24. This means
> selecting an adequate palette. And here we have entered
> the realm of "I have no idea what I'm doing!"
> (or, I do know how to use a palette: mogrify -map pal.gif
> foo.png, but *I don't know how to make one*)
>
> hmm. I don't know how to use the Gimp. I'd sort of like
> to learn, but graphics really isn't my thing. I'd rather
> spend my time learning, say, 3D programming (which I'm
> half stuck into now, really really really cool stuff)
> 95% of the time, xv and the ImageMagick suite are more
> than adequate for my image manipulation needs.
>
> It also occurs to me that maybe I'm being stupid in
> rotating the faces myself. In fact, I probably am being
> stupid. Can the Qt pixmaps be trusted to rotate themselves
> without information loss? Maybe. Hopefully. Let's see.
> I originally chose to rotate the images myself (with shell
> script calls to ImageMagick tools) due to lack of
> familiarity with C++ and lack of familiarity with Qt.

As I mentioned above, it's a speed tradeoff. Pre-rotated images are faste=
r but=20
bulkier. Or Qt can rotate them for you, but it will cause a slight speed=20
penalty. Personally, I'd try the Qt rotation.

--=20
Troy Corbin Jr.
tcorbin@users.sf.net
http://knights.sf.net