SRL Archive - Development

Do we need it? Or will CTS 1 suffice for Bitmaps and DTMs?

I think that for a first release CTS 1 should be enough for both, as I have never seen cts 0/2/3 used for it. Maybe for a later time.

~RM

Cts 1.. Never seen someone use a different CTS for DTM/Bitmaps on purpose..

I do it on purpose (for bitmaps that is).

From: nielsie95
I do it on purpose (for bitmaps that is).

Why? :p

My dtms usually consist of a mainpoint with a color of the object and the other points are points on the black outline. I would like that one color to use cts for the same reasons you use cts in other color searches.

Same for bitmaps, if you have a small bitmap of a hatchet, cts could make the difference you're looking for.

From: nielsie95
My dtms usually consist of a mainpoint with a color of the object and the other points are points on the black outline. I would like that one color to use cts for the same reasons you use cts in other color searches.

Same for bitmaps, if you have a small bitmap of a hatchet, cts could make the difference you're looking for.

Why would you make a bitmap if you can do it by color search? I see where you're comming from though, it's just that implementing HSL for Bitmaps/DTMs will be a huge slow down.. And I thought, still think, that most people use CTS 1 for these searches anyway.

A dtm/bitmap search should basically be a color search, just with more colors near each other. You could do a color search and check the colors around the found point, or you could do a dtm/bitmap search. I would prefer the dtm/bitmap search.

Most people use cts 1 for bitmap searches, because half of them (-probably more-) don't even understand cts.

How about splitting CTS functionality into a FindDTM…/Bitmap…Ex? Would mean speed for general use as it just uses CTS1, but more accuracy for nielsie/anyone else who wants it.

In my opinion the whole point of bitmaps/dtms is that it offers more accuracy than a 'normal' color search. Using CTS 2 on Bitmaps/DTMs would just be overkill.

The ..Ex solution will require every FindBitmap/DTM function to be 'doubled', so that option requires a shitload of code ^_^.

From: mastaraymond
The ..Ex solution will require every FindBitmap/DTM function to be 'doubled', so that option requires a shitload of code ^_^.

Its a lot of copy and paste though… Not a whole lot of changing.

Well, it's a case of speed versus accuracy. You either choose one of the two, combine both as a compromise or both. Not to mention DTMs and bitmaps should remain just about untouched after they're –omg-optimized and any kind of super speedy increases are formed by duplicating flexible code to make it run faster (ie inline HSL checks :))