Search Results

Search found 1524 results on 61 pages for 'stimulating pixels'.

Page 5/61 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • good way of changing all pixels of one particular color to another particular color in a jpeg/png?

    - by gojira666
    I have an image which looks like this: http://img21.imageshack.us/i/64054053.jpg/ However the yellow line needs to be red and the cyan line needs to be green. I have MS Paint and IrfanView. How can I change the colors of the yellow and cyan line without individually selecting all pixels manually? I.e. what is a good way of changing all pixels of one color to another color?

    Read the article

  • How to get the width of a string in pixels?

    - by MA1
    I am using wxPython's HyperTreeList and I want to set the column width exactly equal to length of the largest string in it. To accomplish that, I'd like to to convert a python string size into pixels. For Example: If we have a string like str = "python" len(str) = 6 How could I convert the above string length/size into pixels? Is there another way?

    Read the article

  • Calculating Screen Resolutions Using WPF

    - by Jeff Ferguson
    WPF measures all elements in device independent pixels (DIPs). These DIPs equate to device pixels if the current display monitor is set to the default of 96 DPI. However, for monitors set to a DPI setting that is different than 96 DPI, then WPF DIPs will not correspond directly to monitor pixels. Consider, for example, the WPF properties SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenHeight and SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenWidth. If your monitor resolution is set to 1024 pixels wide by 768 pixels high, and your monitor is set to 96 DPI, then WPF will report the value of SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenHeight as 768 and the value of SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenWidth as 1024. No problem. This aligns nicely because the WPF device independent pixel value (96) matches your monitor's DPI setting (96). However, if your monitor is not set to display pixels at 96 DPI, then SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenHeight and SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenWidth will not return what you expect. The values returned by these properties may be greater than or less than what you expect, depending on whether or not your monitor's DPI value is less than or greater than 96. Since the SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenHeight and SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenWidth properties are WPF properties, their values are measured in WPF DIPs, rather than taking monitor DPI into effect. Once again: WPF measures all elements in device independent pixels (DIPs). To combat this issue, you must take your monitor's DPI settings into effect if you're looking for the monitor's width and height using the monitor's DPI settings. The handy code block below will help you calculate these values regardless of the DPI setting on your monitor: Window MainWindow = Application.Current.MainWindow; PresentationSource MainWindowPresentationSource = PresentationSource.FromVisual(MainWindow); Matrix m = MainWindowPresentationSource.CompositionTarget.TransformToDevice; DpiWidthFactor = m.M11; DpiHeightFactor = m.M22; double ScreenHeight = SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenHeight * DpiHeightFactor; double ScreenWidth = SystemParameters.PrimaryScreenWidth * DpiWidthFactor; The values of ScreenHeight and ScreenWidth should, after this code is executed, match the resolution that you see in the display's Properties window.

    Read the article

  • How big can I make an Android application's canvas in terms of pixels?

    - by user279112
    I've determined an estimate of the size of my Android emulator's screen in pixels, although I think its resolution can be changed to other numbers. Quite frankly though that doesn't eliminate the general problem of not knowing how many pixels on each axis I have to work with on my Android applications in general. The main problem I'm trying to solve is this: How do I make sure I don't use a faulty resolution on Android applications if I want to keep things' sizes constant (so that if the application screen shrinks, for instances, objects will still show up just as big - there just won't be as many of them being shown) if I wish to do this with a single universal resolution for each program? Failing that, how do I make sure everything's alright if I try to do everything the same way with maybe a few different pre-set resolutions? Mainly it seems like a relevant question that must be answered before I can come across a complete answer for the general problem is how big can I always make my application in pixels, NOT regarding if and when a user resizes the application's screen to something smaller than the maximum size permitted by the phone and its operating system. I really want to try to keep this simple. If I were doing this for a modern desktop, for instance, I know that if I design the application with a 800x600 canvas, the user can still shrink the application to the point they're not doing themselves any favors, but at least I can basically count on it working right and not being too big for the monitor or something. Is there such a magic resolution for Android, assuming that I'm designing for API levels 3+ (Android 1.5+)? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to calculate the y-pixels of someones weight on a graph? (math+programming question)

    - by RexOnRoids
    I'm not that smart like some of you geniuses. I need some help from a math whiz. My app draws a graph of the users weight over time. I need a surefire way to always get the right pixel position to draw the weight point at for a given weight. For example, say I want to plot the weight 80.0(kg) on the graph when the range of weights is 80.0 to 40.0kg. I want to be able to plug in the weight (given I know the highest and lowest weights in the range also) and get the pixel result 400(y) (for the top of the graph). The graph is 300 pixels high (starts at 100 and ends at 400). The highest weight 80kg would be plot at 400 while the lowest weight 40kg would be plot at 100. And the intermediate weights should be plotted appropriately. I tried this but it does not work: -(float)weightToPixel:(float)theWeight { float graphMaxY = 400; //The TOP of the graph float graphMinY = 100; //The BOTTOM of the graph float yOffset = 100; //Graph itself is offset 100 pixels in the Y direction float coordDiff = graphMaxY-graphMinY; //The size in pixels of the graph float weightDiff = self.highestWeight-self.lowestWeight; //The weight gap float pixelIncrement = coordDiff/weightDiff; float weightY = (theWeight*pixelIncrement)-(coordDiff-yOffset); //The return value return weightYpixel; }

    Read the article

  • Orthographic unit translation mismatch on grid (e.g. 64 pixels translates incorrectly)

    - by Justin Van Horne
    I am looking for some insight into a small problem with unit translations on a grid. Setup 512x448 window 64x64 grid gl_Position = projection * world * position; projection is defined by ortho(-w/2.0f, w/2.0f, -h/2.0f, h/2.0f); This is a textbook orthogonal projection function. world is defined by a fixed camera position at (0, 0) position is defined by the sprite's position. Problem In the screenshot below (1:1 scaling) the grid spacing is 64x64 and I am drawing the unit at (64, 64), however the unit draws roughly ~10px in the wrong position. I've tried uniform window dimensions to prevent any distortion on the pixel size, but now I am a bit lost in the proper way in providing a 1:1 pixel-to-world-unit projection. Anyhow, here are some quick images to aide in the problem. I decided to super-impose a bunch of the sprites at what the engine believes is 64x offsets. When this seemed off place, I went about and did the base case of 1 unit. Which seemed to line up as expected. The yellow shows a 1px difference in the movement. Vertices It would appear that the vertices going into the vertex shader are correct. For example, in reference to the first image the data looks like this in the VBO: x y x y ---------------------------- tl | 0.0 24.0 64.0 24.0 bl | 0.0 0.0 -> 64.0 0.0 tr | 16.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 br | 16.0 24.0 80.0 24.0 With that said, all I am left to believe is that I am munging up my actual projection. So, I am looking for any insight into maintaining the 1:1 pixel-to-world-unit projection.

    Read the article

  • How can I convince IE to honor my explicit instructions to make a table column X pixels wide? [migrated]

    - by AnthonyWJones
    Please consider this small but complete chunk of HTML: <!DOCTYPE html > <html> <head> <title>Test</title> <style type="text/css"> span {overflow:hidden; white-space:nowrap; } td {overflow:hidden; text-overflow:ellipsis} </style> </head> <body> <table cellspacing="0" > <tbody> <tr> <td nowrap="nowrap" style="max-width:30px; width:30px; white-space:nowrap; "><span>column 1</span></td> <td nowrap="nowrap" style="max-width:30px; width:30px; white-space:nowrap; "><span>column 2</span></td> <td nowrap="nowrap" style="max-width:30px; width:30px; white-space:nowrap; "><span>column 3</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </body> </html> If you render the above in Chrome you'll see the effect I'm looking for. However render it in IE8 or 9 the width and/or max-width is ignored. So my question is how do get IE to simply let me specify the width of a cell explicitly? BTW, I've tried various combinations of table-layout:fixed and using colgroup with cols and all sorts, nothing I've tried convinces IE to what I'm clearly asking it to explicitly do? If I had any hair before starting this I wouldn't have any left by now.

    Read the article

  • Best way to determine surface normal for a group of pixels?

    - by Paul Renton
    One of my current endeavors is creating a 2D destructible terrain engine for iOS Cocos2D (See https://github.com/crebstar/PWNDestructibleTerrain ). It is in an infant stages no doubt, but I have made significant progress since starting a couple weeks ago. However, I have run into a bit of a performance road block with calculating surface normals. Note: For my destructible terrain engine, an alpha of 0 is considered to not be solid ground. The method posted below works just great given small rectangles, such as n < 30. Anything above 30 causes a dip in the frame rate. If you approach 100x100 then you might as well read a book while the sprite attempts to traverse the terrain. At the moment this is the best I can come up with for altering the angle on a sprite as it roams across terrain (to get the angle for a sprite's orientation just take dot product of 100 * normal * (1,0) vector). -(CGPoint)getAverageSurfaceNormalAt:(CGPoint)pt withRect:(CGRect)area { float avgX = 0; float avgY = 0; ccColor4B color = ccc4(0, 0, 0, 0); CGPoint normal; float len; for (int w = area.size.width; w >= -area.size.width; w--) { for (int h = area.size.height; h >= -area.size.height; h--) { CGPoint pixPt = ccp(w + pt.x, h + pt.y); if ([self pixelAt:pixPt colorCache:&color]) { if (color.a != 0) { avgX -= w; avgY -= h; } // end inner if } // end outer if } // end inner for } // end outer for len = sqrtf(avgX * avgX + avgY * avgY); if (len == 0) { normal = ccp(avgX, avgY); } else { normal = ccp(avgX/len, avgY/len); } // end if return normal; } // end get My problem is I have sprites that require larger rectangles in order for their movement to look realistic. I considered doing a cache of all surface normals, but this lead to issues of knowing when to recalculate the surface normals and these calculations also being quite expensive (also how large should the blocks be?). Another smaller issue is I don't know how to properly treat the case when length is = 0. So I am stuck... Any advice from the community would be greatly appreciated! Is my method the best possible one? Or should I rethink the algorithm? I am new to game development and always looking to learn new tips and tricks.

    Read the article

  • Retrieve the coordinates of the *occluding* (closest/drawn) pixels during 3D overlap, using OpenGL?

    - by Big Rich
    Hi, Sorry if the question is not worded well, I'm a new to both 3D and OpenGL. How could I go about obtaining the 3D coordinates of the occluding object, at the point where occlusion is happening (i.e. the 'intersection' of the object in front/closest to the screen)? Just to offer a [very] rudimentary, visual, example, if you were to form an index-finger cross, with your right hand closest to your face, I'd like to know the coordinates of the part of your right finger which obscures the other finger (obviously back within the OpenGL context - no jokers ;-) ). If there is a way to find out both about the occluder (hider) and the occluded (hidden) objects in OpenGL, then that would be of great use, also. Cheers Rich

    Read the article

  • Most optimal way to detect if black (or any color pixels) exist in an image file?

    - by Zando
    What's the best and most flexible algorithm to detect any black (or colored pixel) in a given image file? Say I'm given an image file that could, say, have a blue background. And any non blue pixel, including a white pixel, is counted as a "mark". The function returns true if there are X number of pixels that deviate from each other at a certain threshold. I thought it'd be fastest to just simply iterate through every pixel and see if its color matches the last. But if it's the case that pixel (0,0) is deviant, and every other pixel is the same color (and I want to allow at least a couple deviated pixels before considering an image to be "marked), this won't work or be terribly efficient.

    Read the article

  • Can I make Firefox ignore/interpret font sizes specified in pixels?

    - by Andy
    Hi all, I have an 11.1" notebook display with 1366x768 resolution, which gives it a DPI of 141. I'm running GNOME and have configured the DPI. Everything works OK except web browsing - far too many websites specify their font sizes in pixels, which ends up with very small text on a high DPI display. My ideal solution would be for Firefox to interpret an absolute pixel size in terms of normal DPI and display it appropriately for my DPI (eg scale it by 141/96). Obviously this would cause problems on the occasion where graphics had been pixel-aligned with fonts in some way, but I imagine that would cause me far less of a headache than either reading minute text, or scaling the text manually each time. Any suggestions? TIA, Andy

    Read the article

  • How to set up a Bitmap with unmanaged data?

    - by Danvil
    I have int width, height; and IntPtr data; which comes from a unmanaged unsigned char* pointer and I would like to create a Bitmap to show the image data in a GUI. Please consider, that width must not be a multiple of 4, i do not have a "stride" and my image data is aligned as BGRA. The following code works: byte[] pixels = new byte[4*width*height]; System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.Copy(data, pixels, 0, pixels.Length); var bmp = new Bitmap(width, height, System.Drawing.Imaging.PixelFormat.Format32bppArgb); for(int i=0; i<height; i++) { for(int j=0; j<width; j++) { int p = 4*(width*i + j); bmp.SetPixel(j, i, Color.FromArgb(pixels[p+3], pixels[p+2], pixels[p+1], pixels[p+0])); } } Is there a more direct way to copy the data?

    Read the article

  • How to convert a byte array of 19200 bytes in size where each byte represents 4 pixels (2 bits per p

    - by Klinger
    I am communicating with an instrument (remote controlling it) and one of the things I need to do is to draw the instrument screen. In order to get the screen I issue a command and the instrument replies with an array of bytes that represents the screen. Below is what the instrument manual has to say about converting the response to the actual screen: The command retrieves the framebuffer data used for the display. It is 19200 bytes in size, 2-bits per pixel, 4 pixels per byte arranged as 320x240 characteres. The data is sent in RLE encoded form. To convert this data into a BMP for use in Windows, it needs to be turned into a 4BPP. Also note that BMP files are upside down relative to this data, i.e. the top display line is the last line in the BMP. I managed to unpack the data, but now I am stuck on how to actually go from the unpacked byte array to a bitmap. My background on this is pretty close to zero and my searches have not revealed much either. I am looking for directions and/or articles I could use to help me undestand how to get this done. Any code or even pseudo code would also help. :-) So, just to summarize it all: How to convert a byte array of 19200 bytes in size, where each byte represents 4 pixels (2 bits per pixel), to a bitmap arranged as 320x240 characters. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • jQuery: Scroll down page a set increment (in pixels) on click?

    - by bcWeb
    I'm trying to make a page scroll down 150px from the current position when an element is clicked. So lets say you're roughly halfway scrolled down a page. You click this link, and it will slide you down an additional 150 pixels. Is this possible with jQuery? I've been looking at scrollTop and the scrollTo plugin, but I can't seem to connect the dots.

    Read the article

  • Java: how to do fast copy of a BufferedImage's pixels? (include unit test)

    - by WizardOfOdds
    I want to do a copy (of a rectangle area) of the ARGB values from a source BufferedImage into a destination BufferedImage. No compositing should be done: if I copy a pixel with an ARGB value of 0x8000BE50 (alpha value at 128), then the destination pixel must be exactly 0x8000BE50, totally overriding the destination pixel. I've got a very precise question and I made a unit test to show what I need. The unit test is fully functional and self-contained and is passing fine and is doing precisely what I want. However, I want a faster and more memory efficient method to replace copySrcIntoDstAt(...). That's the whole point of my question: I'm not after how to "fill" the image in a faster way (what I did is just an example to have a unit test). All I want is to know what would be a fast and memory efficient way to do it (ie fast and not creating needless objects). The proof-of-concept implementation I've made is obviously very memory efficient, but it is slow (doing one getRGB and one setRGB for every pixel). Schematically, I've got this: (where A indicates corresponding pixels from the destination image before the copy) AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA And I want to have this: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA where 'B' represents the pixels from the src image. I'm looking for an exact replacement of the method, not for an API link/quote. import org.junit.Test; import java.awt.image.BufferedImage; import static org.junit.Assert.*; public class TestCopy { private static final int COL1 = 0x8000BE50; // alpha at 128 private static final int COL2 = 0x1732FE87; // alpha at 23 @Test public void testPixelsCopy() { final BufferedImage src = new BufferedImage( 5, 5, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_ARGB ); final BufferedImage dst = new BufferedImage( 20, 20, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_ARGB ); convenienceFill( src, COL1 ); convenienceFill( dst, COL2 ); copySrcIntoDstAt( src, dst, 3, 4 ); for (int x = 0; x < dst.getWidth(); x++) { for (int y = 0; y < dst.getHeight(); y++) { if ( x >= 3 && x <= 7 && y >= 4 && y <= 8 ) { assertEquals( COL1, dst.getRGB(x,y) ); } else { assertEquals( COL2, dst.getRGB(x,y) ); } } } } // clipping is unnecessary private static void copySrcIntoDstAt( final BufferedImage src, final BufferedImage dst, final int dx, final int dy ) { // TODO: replace this by a much more efficient method for (int x = 0; x < src.getWidth(); x++) { for (int y = 0; y < src.getHeight(); y++) { dst.setRGB( dx + x, dy + y, src.getRGB(x,y) ); } } } // This method is just a convenience method, there's // no point in optimizing this method, this is not what // this question is about private static void convenienceFill( final BufferedImage bi, final int color ) { for (int x = 0; x < bi.getWidth(); x++) { for (int y = 0; y < bi.getHeight(); y++) { bi.setRGB( x, y, color ); } } } }

    Read the article

  • In 3D camera math, calculate what Z depth is pixel unity for a given FOV

    - by badweasel
    I am working in iOS and OpenGL ES 2.0. Through trial and error I've figured out a frustum to where at a specific z depth pixels drawn are 1 to 1 with my source textures. So 1 pixel in my texture is 1 pixel on the screen. For 2d games this is good. Of course it means that I also factor in things like the size of the quad and the size of the texture. For example if my sprite is a quad 32x32 pixels. The quad size is 3.2 units wide and tall. And the texcoords are 32 / the size of the texture wide and tall. Then the frustum is: matrixFrustum(-(float)backingWidth/frustumScale,(float)backingWidth/frustumScale, -(float)backingHeight/frustumScale, (float)backingHeight/frustumScale, 40, 1000, mProjection); Where frustumScale is 800 for a retina screen. Then at a distance of 800 from camera the sprite is pixel for pixel the same as photoshop. For 3d games sometimes I still want to be able to do this. But depending on the scene I sometimes need the FOV to be different things. I'm looking for a way to figure out what Z depth will achieve this same pixel unity for a given FOV. For this my mProjection is set using: matrixPerspective(cameraFOV, near, far, (float)backingWidth / (float)backingHeight, mProjection); With testing I found that at an FOV of 45.0 a Z of 38.5 is very close to pixel unity. And at an FOV of 30.0 a Z of 59.5 is about right. But how can I calculate a value that is spot on? Here's my matrixPerspecitve code: void matrixPerspective(float angle, float near, float far, float aspect, mat4 m) { //float size = near * tanf(angle / 360.0 * M_PI); float size = near * tanf(degreesToRadians(angle) / 2.0); float left = -size, right = size, bottom = -size / aspect, top = size / aspect; // Unused values in perspective formula. m[1] = m[2] = m[3] = m[4] = 0; m[6] = m[7] = m[12] = m[13] = m[15] = 0; // Perspective formula. m[0] = 2 * near / (right - left); m[5] = 2 * near / (top - bottom); m[8] = (right + left) / (right - left); m[9] = (top + bottom) / (top - bottom); m[10] = -(far + near) / (far - near); m[11] = -1; m[14] = -(2 * far * near) / (far - near); } And my mView is set using: lookAtMatrix(cameraPos, camLookAt, camUpVector, mView); * UPDATE * I'm going to leave this here in case anyone has a different solution, can explain how they do it, or why this works. This is what I figured out. In my system I use a 10th scale unit to pixels on non-retina displays and a 20th scale on retina displays. The iPhone is 640 pixels wide on retina and 320 pixels wide on non-retina (obsolete). So if I want something to be the full screen width I divide by 20 to get the OpenGL unit width. Then divide that by 2 to get the left and right unit position. Something 32 units wide centered on the screen goes from -16 to +16. Believe it or not I have an excel spreadsheet do all this math for me and output all the vertex data for my sprite sheet. It's an arbitrary thing I made up to do .1 units = 1 non-retina pixel or 2 retina pixels. I could have made it .01 units = 2 pixels and someday I might switch to that. But for now it's the other. So the width of the screen in units is 32.0, and that means the left most pixel is at -16.0 and the right most is at 16.0. After messing a bit I figured out that if I take the [0] value of an identity modelViewProjection matrix and multiply it by 16 I get the depth required to get 1:1 pixels. I don't know why. I don't know if the 16 is related to the screen size or just a lucky guess. But I did a test where I placed a sprite at that calculated depth and varied the FOV through all the valid values and the object stays steady on screen with 1:1 pixels. So now I'm just calculating the unityDepth that way. If someone gives me a better answer I'll checkmark it.

    Read the article

  • how to initialize and implement the matrix inside the function in objective-C?

    - by Rajendra Bhole
    Hi, I want to develop an application in which i want to be initialize the matrix for manipulation. The code as follows, struct pixel { Byte r, g, b,a; int count; }; (NSInteger) processImage1: (UIImage*) image { struct pixel* pixels = (struct pixel*) calloc(1, image.size.width * image.size.height * sizeof(struct pixel)); if (pixels != nil) { // Create a new bitmap CGContextRef context = CGBitmapContextCreate( (void*) pixels, image.size.width, image.size.height, 8, image.size.width * 4, CGImageGetColorSpace(image.CGImage), kCGImageAlphaPremultipliedLast ); if (context != NULL) { // Draw the image in the bitmap CGContextDrawImage(context, CGRectMake(0.0f, 0.0f, image.size.width, image.size.height), image.CGImage); NSUInteger numberOfPixels = image.size.width * image.size.height; while (numberOfPixels &gt; 0) { if (pixels->r == 254 || pixels->g == 77 || pixels->b==254) { numberOfRedPixels++; } pixels++; numberOfPixels--; } CGContextRelease(context); } free(pixels); } return 1; } I want to implement the matrix inside the function of - (NSInteger) processImage1: (UIImage*) image {} The matrix should have be row = image.size.width and column = image.size.height.

    Read the article

  • Translate google co-ordinates to the pixels on picture.

    - by kalininew
    I have a city "map" (for example - Moscow). She in accuracy repeats the contours the given city in google maps (that is it is copied from google maps and it is a little processed, but the sense remained the same). Also I have object co-ordinates in a city (in co-ordinates of google). Problem: how to translate google co-ordinates to the co-ordinates of my picture (that is in pixels on OX and OY on a picture). That is I receive google-co-ordinates and it is necessary for me to draw this point on my picture. I know that on small scales (for example on city scales) it to make simply enough (it is necessary to learn what google-co-ordinates has one of picture corners, then to learn "price" of one pixel in google-co-ordinates on a picture on axes OX and OY separately). But on the big scales (country scale) "price" of one pixel will be not a constant, and will vary strongly enough and the method described above cannot be applied. How to solve a problem on country scales?

    Read the article

  • Why are Views loaded from nibs being placed 20 pixels down from the status bar?

    - by rickharrison
    I am trying to set up a layout as such in an iPad application. It will have three major views, which make up the whole screen. The views will be stacked one on top of the other, each taking up the full width. I have one major nib file which accounts for the entire screen space. In that nib file, I am instantiating the three view controllers with outlets. Then I have this code: - (void)viewDidLoad { [super viewDidLoad]; [self.view addSubview:controllerOne.view]; [self.view addSubview:controllerTwo.view]; [self.view addSubview:controllerThree.view]; } This adds the views on top of one another and 20 pixels lower. However, after rotating to landscape and back they are right under the status bar. Do you know what would be causing this?

    Read the article

  • Gimp: Color to alpha

    - by MTilsted
    I have an image where I want all the pixels with a specific color converted to transparent pixels. The operation should not change the color/alpha value of any pixel which don't match the color exactly. How do I do that? At first I thought I could use Colors-"Color to Alpha" but that don't work because it changes the color of all pixels(It adds an alpha value to all pixels). Using Gimp 2.6.11 on Linux

    Read the article

  • EOF error encountered while converting bytearray to bitmapdata

    - by intoTHEwild
    I am using var bitmapdata:BitmapData=new BitmapData(); var pixels:Bytearray=new Bytearray(); pixels = rleDecodePixles(); bitmapdata.setPixels(bitmapdata.rect, pixels); In the 4th line in the code above i am getting "Error: Error #2030: End of file was encountered." I checked the length of the pixels object which is 4 times the width*height of the rect object. Given that setPixels() functions reads unsigned int from bytearray and sets that value to pixels, I think it should work. But I have no clue why this wont work. The pixels object is filled after RLE decoding of the data which i get from a server. Is there any work around or any other method which I could try to use. The loader class wont work as the data that I get from the server is not in any of the recognized format. Any help is greatly appreciated. Shrikant Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >