Re: Convert 3200

[Daniel Webster <dwebster@monmouth.com>]

Joe,

I didn't really want to get into this on the Newsgroup, but if you
looked at the conversions I sent you it is clear that the 16 color
version I produced with Convert3200 is not nearly as good as the 16
color one I produced with SuperConvert.  Not subjectively, but
objectively (sp?).  The 256 colors file I sent you was a pretty good
conversion, but it was almost identical to the 16 color version I
produced with Superconvert.  I was hoping for some insight on using
Conv3200.  Try turning the dither option off in Super Convert and using
the closest match option to achieve the results that I did.  While it is
true that a Rose by any other name would smell as sweet, the rose should
look better in 256 colors than in 16 :)

So what did you do that I didn't?  I'm not looking to verbally trash
Conv3200, I'm trying to get it to achieve its full potential when I use
it.  Believe me I'd much rather use a program that is actively supported
than an older program!  After seeing some of the programs that Brutal
Deluxe has produced, I really have to believe that I am not tapping the
full potential of Conv3200.



Joe Kohn wrote:

> 
> There must be some truth to the adage - "Beauty is in the eye of
> the beholder" - because to me, the 16 color conversion that I did with
> Convert 3200 of the GIF you sent looked just fine to me. In fact, I also
> converted the GIF using Prism and SuperConvert, and of the three graphics, I
> personally thought that the one achieved using Convert 3200 was the best
> of the lot.
> 
> Joe Kohn
> Publisher, Convert 3200
> 
> http://www.crl.com/~joko