I was under the impression that you COULD get gradients in vectors
vectors being defined by the fact that they are not composed of x number of pixels by y number of pixels, but by a series of points (the vertices) separated only by relative distance, and that the shapes involved are made by rules connecting the vertices, making the image theoretically indefinitely scalable without the pixellation found when zooming way the fuck in to a bitmap, for example.
Given this framework, I'd imgaine it's relatively simple to define the colour for a shape as fading from 1 colour to another in a defined direction.
(MockingbirdPractitioner of SCIENCE,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:35,
archived)
gradients in a vector image as created in illustrator:
(theoriginalsteve<this space intentionally left blank>,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:41,
archived)
Kewl!
*insert generic rant about Star Wars prequels*
(barryheadwoundMul-ti-pass? Multipass!,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:49,
archived)
they didn't happen
(prodigy69broke b3ta and made everyone leave,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:57,
archived)
what didn't happen?
(barryheadwoundMul-ti-pass? Multipass!,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:58,
archived)
I don't know.
Let's forget about it and watch ALL THREE indiana jones films of which there are ONLY THREE with the possible addition of River Phoenix in "Young Indiana Jones".
(MockingbirdPractitioner of SCIENCE,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 11:00,
archived)
and on a related subject, how many matrix and terminator films are there?
(theoriginalsteve<this space intentionally left blank>,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 11:04,
archived)
3 matrix, 4 terminator as far as I know/can see
They both contained fucking awful slightly less good films (see: editing in T4, music in matrix 2+3)
(MockingbirdPractitioner of SCIENCE,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 11:09,
archived)
hmmm... well, I tend to ignore terminators 3 and 4 (I'll admit I sort of enjoyed them, but they just don't "fit it" somehow)
matrix 2 and 3 were just shockingly bad
(theoriginalsteve<this space intentionally left blank>,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 11:13,
archived)
Yeah, George Lucas always intended to make them
but never got round to it. Probably for the best - they'd just be crammed full of modern special effects.
(El Cid...wing attack plan R...,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 13:20,
archived)
I like this.
It is both informative and pretty. Also, were my vague guesses about vectors at all accurate?
(MockingbirdPractitioner of SCIENCE,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:50,
archived)
I almost understood your explanation!
I get the bit about vertices etc, but I didn't think about the whole 'rules' thing - I was just thinking they'd need to be individually plotted bands of shade.
Or something.
(barryheadwoundMul-ti-pass? Multipass!,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:53,
archived)
I think your guesses were spot on, as it happens! :D
(theoriginalsteve<this space intentionally left blank>,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:57,
archived)
Yeah!
/skypunch
(MockingbirdPractitioner of SCIENCE,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 11:01,
archived)
You have a matrix transform for the fill and this imaginary idealised gradient and then you invert the matrix and copy the pixels over.
(_Felix's school of dance and occult sciences,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:49,
archived)
what?
I feel you are mocking my lack of actual knowledge. If so, carry on.
(MockingbirdPractitioner of SCIENCE,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:51,
archived)
I said words.
I wrote this thing for rendering images from SWF format, and gradients work sort of like those words I said.
(_Felix's school of dance and occult sciences,
Mon 18 Jan 2010, 10:54,
archived)
Share to
Hide / Ignore
Hide
If you want to unhide this post later, click the "update profile" link in the top navigation bar, and scroll down to the bottom.
Ignore
You will be blisfully unaware of this user for just one week