It's huge!(which means it's a bit poor quality)
I think this would look better with less optimising and smaller.
It is as fantastic as its predecessors, however.
(I think this would look better with less optimising and smaller.
It is as fantastic as its predecessors, however.
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:38,
archived)
click thiswww2.b3ta.com/host/creative/46786/1205094967/proj69diabolikdance2.gif
without width=500 it looks alot better :)
(without width=500 it looks alot better :)
SkUG >_O i got a couple of stitches in my eyeball... ow,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:40,
archived)
bollocks does itI was going to do it 1120 but thought people would complain too much
(
HappyToast Groat froth,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:44,
archived)
now someone tell him it's my design*chuckles*
prodigy69 broke b3ta and made everyone leave,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:41,
archived)
I did yesterdayand his comment was, that he prefered the original diabolik.
He's never happy.
(He's never happy.
HappyToast Groat froth,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:42,
archived)
he's a cock..whacha expect :) prodigy69 broke b3ta and made everyone leave,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:42,
archived)
I think it's a smaller filebut with img width=xxx in, smaller version is schmoooth
( McBadger COW,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:41,
archived)
the smaller one is no smootherthey are the same file, you can just see the pixels a bit easier. This is about motion, not colour depth, if I gave a shit about that I wouldn't be posting it on this site as a gif!
( HappyToast Groat froth,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:43,
archived)
that's what I meant, I'm not very technically aptI'm not complaining, it's bloody good!
( McBadger COW,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:46,
archived)
well you do it that way then, I chose to make it look like this HappyToast Groat froth,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:41,
archived)
I was offering constructive criticism,not suggesting that you are a cunt.
( LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:48,
archived)
no you weren'tyou were saying it's poor quality.
But at 256 dithered colours is at the highest level you can achieve with a gif animation ;P
(But at 256 dithered colours is at the highest level you can achieve with a gif animation ;P
HappyToast Groat froth,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:50,
archived)
I was wrong about the reason,but the quality is poor.
The fact that this is not because of optimisation, but because you have inexplicably chosen to stretch an image does not stop it being pixelated.
The file, when viewed at the size it was saved at, looks smoother and the motion looks better as well.
Perhaps you are on a monitor with an exceptionally high resolution, but here the stretched one looks significantly worse.
(The fact that this is not because of optimisation, but because you have inexplicably chosen to stretch an image does not stop it being pixelated.
The file, when viewed at the size it was saved at, looks smoother and the motion looks better as well.
Perhaps you are on a monitor with an exceptionally high resolution, but here the stretched one looks significantly worse.
LordManley twitter.com/LordManley,
Sun 9 Mar 2008, 20:56,
archived)