Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Well for 40 colors exactly, I don't know if you'll prefer 40x1, 20x2, 10x4,
8x5, 5x8...
Sounds like the most comfortable option would be a lists of presets, sorted by
color count ex:
8x8 (64)
4x4 (16)
4x1 (4)
Then grafx2 can run up the list until it finds a setting that can include all
image colors. For example in the case above, a 8-color image would use the 4x4
setting.
If none fits, it picks the biggest one : it can scroll anyway.
Original comment by yrizoud
on 26 Sep 2012 at 2:42
I never did it, but my idea was to find a setting that allows the color
swatches to be as square as possible, given the range to display and the
available space in the menu.
The algorithm is not too complicated:
* Let H,W be the size of the available palette space
* Start with one line of N colors. Compute h = H/N, w = W/1. Ratio[1] = w/h = W*N/H
* Try with 2 lines of (N+1)/2 colors. h = 2H/N, w = W/2. Ratio[2] = w/h = WN/4H
* If ratio is less than 1, compute Ratio[2] = 4H/WN instead.
* If Ratio[2] > Ratio[1], Ratio[1] is optimal.
* Else, try with 3 lines of (N+1)/3 colors...
* Stop when we reach N lines (we shouldn't ever, because W > H).
Original comment by pulkoma...@gmail.com
on 26 Sep 2012 at 7:49
Hmm yes I'm not 100% sure how effective autolayout would be, but I work on
pieces ranging anywhere from 4 to 100+ colours and since these things are not
saved per project I always have to set the palette layout by hand when I switch
projects. Even if auto-layout is not super-flawless it would still hopefully
give a very practical result.
If it's any help, I find that if cells can't be square, it's usually better for
them to be slightly wider than slightly taller :)
Original comment by ilija.melentijevic
on 26 Sep 2012 at 10:50
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
ilija.melentijevic
on 26 Sep 2012 at 12:32