Preserved Topic: Transparency gods, help me. (Page 1 of 1)

I made an image, and set the background to transparent in Image Ready. Now I save it as a gif and it's got these weird jankety white jaggies that I can't get rid of to save my life. Help?

Did you set matte color correctly?

Yep, ya gotta set the matte color that it will put behind partially transparent pixels. If you're doing something for this forum I would use #280404. Otherwise it will depend on whatever background the gif is going to be on.

I was having trouble witht that as well. I thought the theory of using a transparent image is so that it can be placed on any color bg and blend in? But I noticed you have to set the matte color? I have never been successfull using transparencies. I wanted to try something like this....
www.kioken.com This is one of my favorite sites. very cool, very professional looking.

thoughts?

You're forgetting that pixels in GIF images can either contain color or be totaly transparent. So you can't have gradient transparencies for example. Anyway, take a look at these links for more info: http://www.handson.nu/HTML/transparency.shtml & http://www.handson.nu/HTML/dither.shtml

the handson links are pretty good tutorials about transparency....
don't believe me?

ozones.com
look for the interfaces.. some has real cool transparency

underneath this page you find some buttons for the gurusnetwork and the handson tut's follow them
they are cool

~Rinswind ~

Geeze, good thing krets isn't a math teacher. The average background color is #2B0404, not #280404. Hexadecimal, doncha know.

Not that they're really distinguishable, just being pedantic.

ya better be getting ready Linear.... make sure you warm up correctly.. rgb 40, 4, 4 hex 280404.. no 'b' mate! Kretts wins! haha ~Vp~

Good thing you're not one of my students.... I forsee many one-legged A's in your future....




....Take a look at the name of the image.....

[edit] And what the fuck does that have to do with teaching math??? [/edit]



[This message has been edited by kretsminky (edited 06-21-2001).]

Averaging and base changes.

Looks like Linear better make sure that what he says holds up before he criticizes Krets.

I don't think that I would want Krets mad at me.

The samples look the same to me...

We agree on the last two bytes, so...

0x32 = 50
0x24 = 36

86/2 = 43

43 = 0x2B

linear wins.

Where'd you get 50 and 36 from?

I'm getting 0x31 (49) and 0x21 (33) for the R values. Which averages to 0x29 (41).

What gives?

whoa...numbers...

Use the source, Luke.

<tr bgcolor="#320808">
<tr bgcolor="#240000">

Are you using the eyedropper on a screen cap, Silence?

Actually, I was using pixie on the open page in explorer. What causes the discrepancies? Is it a monitor calibration thing? I thought that only had to do with the radiance of the phosphors on the screen but the pixel values wouldn't change. Is it a browser thing?

Interestingly enough, I tested some other pages and found the following discrepencies:
HTML = #4080ff
Pixie = #4282ff
HTML = #04079d
Pixie = #00049c

What's going on here?

Tell you what, I'll just keep using #280404 and you just keep using #2B0404.

It doesn't really matter either way does it?

You could also use #320808 which is the color you get when you take one color and set it at 50% opacity above a layer with the other color.

I am sure everyone is a little different. Just check yourself before you step on someone's toes.

Quoting myself:
"The average background color is #2B0404, not #280404. Hexadecimal, doncha know.

Not that they're really distinguishable, just being pedantic."

All in good fun. I acknowledged that they were indistinguishable in my first post.

No toe-stepping intended.

And to quote myself, "If you're doing something for this forum I would use #280404."

Fin.



[This message has been edited by kretsminky (edited 06-21-2001).]

Okay, now that you've all made nicey-nicey with each other, would someone mind telling me the reason for the discrepency in what the source specifies and what is actually displayed onscreen?



[This message has been edited by silence (edited 06-21-2001).]