Requested Create Panorama Image color malfunction

[cenzo]

Hi, the problem (bug?) is related to Create Panorama Images...

I've downloaded some (over 200) png files from google maps.. all 256x256 pixel, most of them at 256 colors (8bits per pixel), but some of them at 2 colors (1 bits per pixel - i.e. there is just the sea or the background map).

The problem is when i create a panorama image and the first image is one with 1 bits per pixel (2 color). In this case create panorama.. generate an image with 1 bits per pixel (the depth color of the first image)...but so i loose colors of other images...

It should check all the images and use the depth colors (for the panorama) of the "biggest one" (8 bits per pixel in this case).

Well, i could bypass the problem first converting all images (whenever color depth) at 8 bits per pixel (i went crazy before to find this solution!). But it should be much more nice checking color depht without doing more work around.

I'm using IV 4.10 and Windows XP SP2

[Sam_Zen]

One could call it a malfunction, because the result is not allright.

I doubt though if this is a bug, because the programmed routine is executed correctly :
Use the specifications of the first file in the row for the rest as well.

The same problem was in another thread about the pixel-size of the first image, determining the size of the rest.
So maybe it's more a request to make this dialog more flexible. E.g. choosing an image in the row serving as the custom one.

[cenzo]

I'm sorry to have posted in this forum's section.

Since the routines are designed to use specifications of the first file for all, then clearly it' not a bug.

Could/have i to re-post this thread in the Feature Request section ?

[color=#AA0000][b]No need for sorry. You obviously agree, so I moved the thread[/b][/color]

[cenzo]

About the problem exposed in the first post i did some more investigation.

Just have 2 images, both png 256x256 pixels at 8 BPP (256 colours).
I used the "create panorama image" tool to join the 2 images in a bigger one.
The image resulting (saved as png) is a 512x256 pixlels, but it is 24 BPP !!
Since, as we said, the routines are designed to use specifications of the first file for all, i expected to have an image at 8 BPP.

Can i have made some mistake somewhere ?