Katchoo's Shipset Thread (aka the ungodly slow DoGa guy).

Katchoo · #1 March 31st, 2003, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dogscoff:
Uhh... yeah. Sorry about that ppl, I'll try to get onto it tonight. It just needs to be coloured really...

Don't worry about it

I'm not in any rush

Fyron · #2 March 31st, 2003, 08:54 PM

Rags, buttons are not high quality images. Of course they are not going to look bad as jpgs. We were talking about much more detailed images like ships. Those often look bad in jpg format.

Ragnarok · #3 April 1st, 2003, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Rags, buttons are not high quality images. Of course they are not going to look bad as jpgs. We were talking about much more detailed images like ships. Those often look bad in jpg format.

Ok, bad example on my part. So I'll provide you with another one. I took the Cardassian heavy carrier image and saved it as a .jpg and .png.
And just so you can't say, "Oh, it's a 128x128 image, so that doesn't count." I took the liberty of incresing the size up to 350x350. This of course made the image pixelated, but it will prove my point just the same.
The size of the .jpg image of the carrier at 350x350 pixels, was only 16kb. Not big at all.
The .png of the same image at 350x350 pixels was 95.4kb. Huge for that image.
And you know what? There is no difference in quality. If there is, which I can barely see a difference, it is not enough to make that big of a difference to use .pngs over the net instead of .jpgs. You still get the same image, same quality, at 5x less the size. This effectively reduces bandwidth usage and also the Users load time.

I highly doubt you can argue this point unless it is extreamly unbased or some other wackiness.

Fyron · #4 April 1st, 2003, 03:12 AM

Increasing the image size doesn't matter once you get passed really small images (128x128 is not really small).

I never said that every single jpeg image turns out crappy. It depends on what is in the image file. A lot of ship images I have seen converted to jpegs lost a lot of image quality. It depends on how detailed the image is. The more detail, the more loss there is.

[ April 01, 2003, 01:13: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Raging Deadstar · #5 April 1st, 2003, 07:30 PM

Lol sorry katchoo but i guess your ship design thread has degraded into an argument of whats superior. png's or jpg's.

Well to get back on topic have you got any new images to show us, i'm really curious to see what you've done! Pleeeeeaaaaassssse

Katchoo · #6 April 3rd, 2003, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Raging Deadstar:
Lol sorry katchoo but i guess your ship design thread has degraded into an argument of whats superior. png's or jpg's.

Well to get back on topic have you got any new images to show us, i'm really curious to see what you've done! Pleeeeeaaaaassssse

No worries

I'm updating the website now and will make the Shipset visible. Downloadable? Not yet, but you'll be able to see how it looks so far.

Updates as they come!

Suicide Junkie · #7 April 3rd, 2003, 05:47 AM

Hey, Katchoo, you really should link to that webpage in your sig! Took me a while of digging through this thread to find it again

BTW, I have a suggestion for that future shipset you posted about on page 2 (the one with the big glowing energy sphere in the hull)
If you line up the minis, such that the spheres are in the exact center, then they will be in the exact same location even when the ship turns in combat.
You could then have the shield animation based around that energy sphere. Have it pulse and swirl while projecting the shield!