Problem importing TITLEPIC

[alowe]

I'm using Doom Builder 2 with WAD Mangle. Testing with ZDoom.

 

I've got an 8bit image of resolution 290x240 that can be saved using the Doom palette. Importing it as TITLEPIC into my WAD as BMP or PNG doesn't work.

It saves fine but when tested causes the title screen to flash yellow.

 

Even if I open DOOM1.WAD with Mangle, export the TITLEPIC and import that into my test wad it doesn't work either.

 

SLADE isn't an option for me. Causes BSOD. So, how can I import my own TITLEPIC and why isn't the images I'm importing working, even if they're taken straight from the original Doom wad?

 

Also tested using ImageTool.exe to see if that made a difference but upon converting the BMP the resulting image was identical to the source provided. So, the image itself seems to be fine. The problem seems to be in WAD Mangle. Either it's not importing right (unlikely) or where the TITLEPIC is placed is important. The lumps Mangle display do not have any structure. It's just a sequential list. So, not sure how I can place TITLEPIC where it should be if that's the issue.

[riderr3]

@alowe you can also try XWE lump editor
https://www.doomworld.com/xwe/

[Edward850]

3 hours ago, alowe said:

SLADE isn't an option for me. Causes BSOD.

You have vastly more important problems to focus on than not being able to import a image into a Doom WAD, namely sorting your potentially failing graphics card or other hardware.

[alowe]

10 hours ago, Edward850 said:

You have vastly more important problems to focus on than not being able to import a image into a Doom WAD, namely sorting your potentially failing graphics card or other hardware.

I'm just using an old laptop. There are no issues with other software, just SLADE. At some point I will get a new laptop. Until then, I'm stuck with it. Hopefully will get a new laptop in the summer, fingers crossed.

 

Usually hardware issues are related to compatibility issues between components, but a laptop is a single tested unit where all the components are known to work together. Mine doesn't even have a separate offboard graphics card.

[alowe]

13 hours ago, riderr3 said:

@alowe you can also try XWE lump editor
https://www.doomworld.com/xwe/

Unfortunately the links in that post are all dead. I'll see if I can find it somewhere else. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

Had more luck getting it here: http://www.oocities.org/xwe@rogers.com/

[Blastfrog]

15 minutes ago, alowe said:

Usually hardware issues are related to compatibility issues between components, but a laptop is a single tested unit where all the components are known to work together.

Edward said nothing of compatibility, he was talking about failing components. Which, yes, is a common cause of hardware related issues.

 

And you yourself said:

15 minutes ago, alowe said:

I'm just using an old laptop.

Old. As in more likely to fail than new.

 

13 minutes ago, alowe said:

Unfortunately the links in that post are all dead.

The links are dead because XWE itself is dead (and has been for quite some time, now). Trust me when I say it's not a program you want to use if you don't somehow have to.

[alowe]

1 minute ago, Blastfrog said:

Edward said nothing of compatibility, he was talking about failing components. And you yourself said:

 

Old. As in more likely to fail than new.

 

Fortunately, actually. The links are dead because XWE itself is dead (and has been for quite some time, now).

Failing components can be a false positive of compatibility. The laptop is old doesn't means it's likely to fail - that wasn't my point. What it means is that new software is less likely to work on it since new software is often tested with new hardware.

 

I'll see if XWE can do what I want it to. I won't be adopting it as a WAD editor anyway because I'm happy with DB2.

 

I'm sensing people have an emotional attachment to SLADE so I take it all back. SLADE is GOD.

[alowe]

13 hours ago, riderr3 said:

@alowe you can also try XWE lump editor
https://www.doomworld.com/xwe/

XWE fixed the problem. Thanks :D

 

But for anyone using same get it here: http://www.oocities.org/xwe@rogers.com/

[Blastfrog]

Maybe try editing your post instead of making another mere minutes apart?

 

11 minutes ago, alowe said:

Failing components can be a false positive of compatibility. The laptop is old doesn't means it's likely to fail - that wasn't my point. What it means is that new software is less likely to work on it since new software is often tested with new hardware.

Regardless of the exact cause, if your computer is too old to handle SLADE, it's probably time to move the clock forward at least 2 or 3 years. There's probably a whole lot of other stuff you can't run, and that list will just keep growing the longer you put off upgrading.

 

My computer is over half a decade old by now and I'm still able to do everything I want with it. I'm one of those weirdos who refuses to move beyond Windows 7 until it's no longer viable to do so. I can't imagine how badly you've shot yourself in the foot in comparison.

 

12 minutes ago, alowe said:

I'm sensing people have an emotional attachment to SLADE so I take it all back. SLADE is GOD.

I'm not actually that fond of SLADE, tbh. It's just that I remember loathing XWE for years with all of its problems and was glad that something less terrible came along to replace it.

[Dragonfly]

Another thing to consider, despite claiming to have fixed the solution, is that the resolution of a TITLEPIC graphic by default is 320x200 px.

[alowe]

11 minutes ago, Blastfrog said:

Maybe try editing your post instead of making another mere minutes apart?

 

Regardless of the exact cause, if your computer is too old to handle SLADE, it's probably time to move the clock forward at least 2 or 3 years. There's probably a whole lot of other stuff you can't run, and that list will just keep growing the longer you put off upgrading.

 

My computer is over half a decade old by now and I'm still able to do everything I want with it. I'm one of those weirdos who refuses to move beyond Windows 7 until it's no longer viable to do so. I can't imagine how badly you've shot yourself in the foot in comparison.

 

I'm not actually that fond of SLADE, tbh. It's just that I remember loathing XWE for years with all of its problems and was glad that something less terrible came along to replace it.

Yes I look forward to getting a new laptop in the summer and hopefully that will solve the issue with SLADE. I haven't encountered any problems with other software so maybe just got lucky.

 

The laptop is 11 years old! I saved it from a trip to the bin 2 years ago and it has been reliable ever since. Not a fan of the throwaway culture currently raping the planet.

 

3 minutes ago, Dragonfly said:

Another thing to consider, despite claiming to have fixed the solution, is that the resolution of a TITLEPIC graphic by default is 320x200 px.

Yes I investigated this before. As far as I can tell ZDoom is quite accommodating. It's centres any image that is smaller than the largest permittable resolution. Can't remember why I chose the res I did. Probably got it from some outdated manual as it's not a res I normally work with.

[Gez]

SLADE shouldn't cause BSOD. Things like refusing to start, or crashing on start, yes, possibly; but causing the entire system to crash (blue screen of death) simply shouldn't be possible. Starting from Windows NT (so this includes Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10...) BSOD can only happen for irrecoverable errors in kernel mode. Which means that the cause of the bug lies in either the OS, a driver, or the hardware.

 

Now it's possible that SLADE is the only application you've tried which triggers the conditions for the glitch to happen, but the problem cannot be in SLADE itself. Applications aren't allowed to run in kernel mode, so the worst thing that an irrecoverable error in application mode can cause is the application getting shut down buy the OS (crash to desktop). If you get BSOD instead of CTD, you've got a problem lurking on that laptop.

[Dragonfly]

If working for ZDoom I'd suggest going the full opposite direction and producing a TITLEPIC at 16:9 aspect ratio, either 720p (1280x720) or 1080p (1920x1080). Or more interesting, is the TITLEMAP feature. ;)

[alowe]

20 hours ago, Gez said:

SLADE shouldn't cause BSOD. Things like refusing to start, or crashing on start, yes, possibly; but causing the entire system to crash (blue screen of death) simply shouldn't be possible. Starting from Windows NT (so this includes Windows XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10...) BSOD can only happen for irrecoverable errors in kernel mode. Which means that the cause of the bug lies in either the OS, a driver, or the hardware.

 

Now it's possible that SLADE is the only application you've tried which triggers the conditions for the glitch to happen, but the problem cannot be in SLADE itself. Applications aren't allowed to run in kernel mode, so the worst thing that an irrecoverable error in application mode can cause is the application getting shut down buy the OS (crash to desktop). If you get BSOD instead of CTD, you've got a problem lurking on that laptop.

The thread is about TITLEPIC, not SLADE. My comment on SLADE was a sidenote to prevent people suggesting I use SLADE to add TITLEPIC.

 

I have no problem with SLADE. Just can't use it. I don't think there is a problem with SLADE. I'm not interested in solving the issue because the solution is just to get a new laptop, and that takes time and money. If there's a problem on the laptop, I don't care. It's not a problem for me. I just use a workaround for now.

 

The solution isn't a software or hardware solution, it's a finance solution :o)

 

20 hours ago, Dragonfly said:

If working for ZDoom I'd suggest going the full opposite direction and producing a TITLEPIC at 16:9 aspect ratio, either 720p (1280x720) or 1080p (1920x1080). Or more interesting, is the TITLEMAP feature. ;)

My intention is to keep my PWAD backwards compatible. For that reason I'm only using original sprites and flats etc, no scripts and only original resolutions. If I wanted a more modern Doom I'd mod for Doom 3.

[Bauul]

7 hours ago, alowe said:

My intention is to keep my PWAD backwards compatible.

I might be wrong, but if you want it to be fully vanilla backwards compatible, I think the TITLEPIC has to be 320x200.  You probably should be testing your wad in something like Chocolate Doom.

[alowe]

2 hours ago, Bauul said:

I might be wrong, but if you want it to be fully vanilla backwards compatible, I think the TITLEPIC has to be 320x200.  You probably should be testing your wad in something like Chocolate Doom.

It is now 320x200 thanks :o)

 

If I'm going to make it truly backward compatible, I'd test it with the original Doom DOS executable. I'm not that fussed but at least want it to be true to the spirit of the original, if not literally.

 

Would probably have to buy an old Pentium or even a 486 DX to test it though. Haven't used a DX for ages.

[Capellan]

3 hours ago, alowe said:

If I'm going to make it truly backward compatible, I'd test it with the original Doom DOS executable. I'm not that fussed but at least want it to be true to the spirit of the original, if not literally.

 

If you claim backwards compatibility on your release, and your WAD fails with Chocolate Doom (or PrBoom+ in compat 2), you can expect to be ... stridently informed of that fact ... by people who take you at your word.  Either don't claim it, or test it right.

 

[alowe]

On 19/01/2018 at 1:20 AM, Capellan said:

 

If you claim backwards compatibility on your release, and your WAD fails with Chocolate Doom (or PrBoom+ in compat 2), you can expect to be ... stridently informed of that fact ... by people who take you at your word.  Either don't claim it, or test it right.

 

I've already addressed this. Here's a quote:

 

"If I'm going to make it truly backward compatible, I'd test it with the original Doom DOS executable."

 

So, you see, if I wanted to prove backwards compatibility I would only use the original DOS executable. Chocolate Doom, for me, adds an element of the unknown. I know I can trust the original executable but I don't know if I can trust Chocolate Doom, so I would default to the original executable.

 

Note, I predicate all of this on an 'If'. People who think I'm claiming anything really need to learn to read properly.