Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!olivea!orc!inews!iwarp.intel.com!gargoyle!igloo!miroc!caw From: caw@miroc.Chi.IL.US (Christopher A. Wichura) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: GIF->IFF/HAM ??? Message-ID: Date: 6 Jan 91 06:22:27 GMT References: <40800@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <1991Jan5.182116.20762@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <1991Jan6.025656.11959@marlin.jcu.edu.au> Lines: 31 In article <1991Jan5.182116.20762@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> md41@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Marcus Dolengo) writes: >Generally all the GIF->IFF >converters are slow, I've never used VIRTGIF but if it's faster than >GIF Machine on Fred Fish 404? (somewhere around there !) I'd like to >know about it. Thanks. I use GIFMachine a lot. After all, I wrote it. You made reference to the version on Fish #404 (might be #405, I forget). That version requires KickStart 2.0, so unless you're a developer you should be running on an A3000. I don't know about you, but mine will convert a 640x480 pic with XCOMP and DITHER options in less than three minutes (no other load on the system). That's not too shabby. It is true that on a 68000 it is terribly slow. Other convertors are faster, but then they probably don't give as good an image. In comparison to VirtGIF, I would say that VirtGIF is probably faster on a 68000 machine, and about the same speed on my A3000 (or even a little slower, it takes longer than it ought to...). However, the results you will get from VirtGIF will be no where near the quality of GIFMachine (or a number of other converters like HAMLAB or TAD/ADPro). I hold the opinion that VirtGIF is HAMGIF (alias Giffy) that supports virtual images with scrolling (as opposed to being limited to 320(or 640)x200(or 400) dimensions. Others opinions will probably vary. -=> CAW Christopher A. Wichura Multitasking. Just DO it. caw@miroc.chi.il.us (my amiga) ...the Amiga way... u12401@uicvm.uic.edu (school account)