David Schmenk wrote:
Michael J. Mahon wrote:limtc wrote:Yes dithering from the same color tone actually makes it look pretty good. You don't observed the dithering that much.It sounds like several shades of skin tone (8 or so?) were used in the palette, with remaining colors used for other features. Then the smooth gradient of skin tones was rendered using error diffusion from the available palette. It is usually helpful to use this approach on a photo without large, gentle gradients, so that "banding" is not too objectionable. -michael NadaPong: Network game demo for Apple II computers! Home page: http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/ "The wastebasket is our most important design tool--and it's seriously underused."And not to forget what looked good in 1986 might not look as impressive 20 years later. Computer graphics (color depth and resolution in this case) have improved somewhat in that time. Our expectations have a definite impact as to how we perceive images. I remember seeing my first "photographic" image on an Amiga using it's hold-and-modify mode. I was blown away. You wouldn't look twice at it now, except perhaps to be annoyed by the interlacing.
Exactly right. After viewing the graphics in question, I find that my eye is no longer "pleased" by the horrible approximations involved, though my mind can still appreciate how much is achieved with so little. I find error diffusion particularly offensive in faces, since it makes people look like they have a facial rash. ;-) -michael NadaPong: Network game demo for Apple II computers! Home page: http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/ "The wastebasket is our most important design tool--and it's seriously underused."