home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.graphics
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!Germany.EU.net!mpifr-bonn.mpg.de!speckled.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de!mlelstv
- From: mlelstv@speckled.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
- Subject: Re: N bit planes/pixel or N bits/pixel?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov10.224044.12544@mpifr-bonn.mpg.de>
- Sender: news@mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
- Nntp-Posting-Host: speckled
- Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie
- References: <1dn8rjINNdq3@kitty.ksu.ksu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:40:44 GMT
- Lines: 23
-
- In <1dn8rjINNdq3@kitty.ksu.ksu.edu> sdoran@kitty.ksu.ksu.edu (Steven Marcotte) writes:
- > What is the advantage of N bitplanes/pixel over N bits/pixel? I would
- >think that the N bin/pixel (packed-pixel) representation would offer
- >better speed than jumping through memory and performing bit twiddling,
- >especially at 8 bits/pixel.
-
- It depends on what you are doing. With areas wider than the word length
- the overhead of bitplanes becomes neglible. On the other hand packed
- pixels work only good for common word sizes, i.e. 8bit (256 colors),
- 16-bit (65536 colors) and 24bit+8bit (16 million colors + alpha channel).
- This means that you can't scale the pixel resolution (bits per pixel)
- easily, bitplanes on the other hand are more flexible.
-
- One problem with bitplanes is the higher complexity of the hardware since
- somewhere before the DAC you need to have chunky pixels again. That's why
- bitplane architectures with deep pixels are rare.
-
- Regards,
- --
- Michael van Elst
- UUCP: universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
- Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
- "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
-