640x480x16
Jonatan Magnusson
way.
<\__|\_ _/|__/>
\____ \/ ____/ Greetings,
`oo' Jonatan Magnusson
/ \ jon...@academy.bastad.se 2:200/207.10
\__/ http://www.bastad.se/~jonatan
Rainer Deyke
: What is the best way to draw in mode 12h? Both fastest and easiest
: way.
If you are really interested in 16 color modes, the best info I have
been able to find was from the book PC Game Programming Explorer.
However, 16 color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution. They
are also slow. If I were you I'd either use mode 13h, mode X (with
square pixels), or a 256 color SVGA mode.
--
+----------------------------------------------+
| Rainer Deyke (rai...@mdddhd.fc.hp.com) |
| "The Earth shall inherit the meek" - Carcass |
+----------------------------------------------+
Todd David Rudick
> > However, 16 color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution.
>
> I disagree, done right, 16 colours can look very good
Wasn't "Out of this World" in 16 colors?
That looked great, IMHO.. In fact, I'd say it looked as good or better
than any comperable 256 color game--and it was written by a single person.
+-----------------------+
| Todd David Rudick |
| rud...@cs.arizona.edu |
+-----------------------+
Scott Posch
mode?
SRP
The Cookie Monster
> been able to find was from the book PC Game Programming Explorer.
> However, 16 color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution. They
> are also slow. If I were you I'd either use mode 13h, mode X (with
> square pixels), or a 256 color SVGA mode.
I disagree, done right, 16 colours can look very good, Syndicate looks far
better than any mode 13 equiv. More games should use mode 12 IMHO, Star Control
for instance could have looked far better - Mode 12 presents over twice the
graphic detail as mode 13 and it shows, you just need an artist who can choose
the palette wisely.
Sure there are a lot of games in 16 colours that look bad, but there are a lot
of games you can run on a 486 that look bad - this doesn't mean you can't
run good ones. Gods (I think thats the name(?)) for instance looks like a
[good] 256 colour game (better infact than many other 256 colour games).
Note that EGA games dont count as you dont have an 18bit palette to choose your
colours from like you do with mode 12 so EGA games generally do look ugly.
Some games use the default palette, this is certain death visually. Make sure
you are not judging 16cols on games like these.
Check out the delux version of Carmen Sandiago - it's almost
photo-realistic. I've seen a 16col tile game that had a sort of photo-realistic
feel as well (used mainly greys and browns, like Syndicate).
Of course SVGA is much better. Just avoid 320x200 at all costs unless you need
it low res for a high frame rate. Dont be a lazy bum and use 320x200 cause it's
there or because everyone else does, game like that really bother me :)
Remember... 640x480x16 gives over twice the detail. (And as far as I've seen,
used right it looks much better than 320x200 used right. (depending on the sort
of game of course) ie the detail *does* tanslate to image quality)
Eddie
before judging the 16 color mode. They use pattern technique to simulate
different.
color example like
B - blue color , R - Red color
B R B
R B R <-- 9 pixel on the screen
B R B
this will look like purple.
Kent.Dalton
In article <1995Aug14.112300@cantva> g.fi...@student.canterbury.ac.nz (The Cookie Monster) writes:
>> If you are really interested in 16 color modes, the best info I have been
>> able to find was from the book PC Game Programming Explorer. However, 16
>> color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution. They are also slow. If
>> I were you I'd either use mode 13h, mode X (with square pixels), or a 256
>> color SVGA mode.
The> I disagree, done right, 16 colours can look very good, Syndicate looks
The> far better than any mode 13 equiv.
I agree with your disagreement. The Bullfrog guys (Syndicate and Populous II)
made excellent use of the 16 color hires modes. Probably because they were
experienced at choosing good 16 and 32 color palette's since they had
been supporting the Amiga and Atari ST for a while. I think Warlords II
used this mode to good effect too didn't it?
The> More games should use mode 12 IMHO,
The> Star Control for instance could have looked far better - Mode 12 presents
The> over twice the graphic detail as mode 13 and it shows, you just need an
The> artist who can choose the palette wisely.
Yup. Any game that needs to show a lot of textual info might benefit more
from higher res and well selected 16 color palette than lower res
and more colors, IMHO.
--
/**************************************************************************/
/* Kent Dalton * EMail: Kent....@symbios.com */
/* Symbios Logic, Inc. * Phone: (303) 223-5100 X-9319 */
/* 2001 Danfield Ct. MS470A * FAX: (303) 225-4829 */
/* Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 * Formerly known as NCR Microelectronics */
/**************************************************************************/
Be sure to check out the DIKtators AirWarrior Home Page:
http://www.cris.com/~kentd/diks.enh.html
Ian Ward
> On 14 Aug 1995, The Cookie Monster wrote:
> > > However, 16 color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution.
> >
> > I disagree, done right, 16 colours can look very good
> Wasn't "Out of this World" in 16 colors?
> That looked great, IMHO.. In fact, I'd say it looked as good or better
> than any comperable 256 color game--and it was written by a single person.
Yeah it was. That was a nice game. 16 color graphics can look good as
long as you choose a limited set of hues. Ever seen the Team-17 logo?
-Ian
Tim Lewis
>better than any mode 13 equiv. More games should use mode 12 IMHO, Star Control
>for instance could have looked far better - Mode 12 presents over twice the
>graphic detail as mode 13 and it shows, you just need an artist who can choose
>the palette wisely.
> Gods (I think thats the name(?)) for instance looks like a
>[good] 256 colour game (better infact than many other 256 colour games).
Too true! I learnt to paint in pixels on my old atari st -16 colours out of
a tiny palette of 512 on a 320x200 screen. You really have to choose you're
colours well. The bitmap brothers had artists that could (Mark Coleman and
another guy whose wrok I loved but I can't remember his name (he did Chaos
Engine and Speedball II) and I tried to emulate that style. 32 colours out of
4096 on the amiga was an absolute
luxury! I mostly draw in 256 now but I never use the whole lot and I kinda miss
being really selective about the colours and stipling everthing.
For 3d games 256 is best: fast, easy to write alogs for and drawing in 16
colours needs techniques such as dithering (and good dithering) to get any
decent results: in the vga's plainiar graphics modes this is very slow.
If anybody wants a gander at what my humble self could do in fewer colours,
point your browser at:
'http://cent1.lancs.ac.uk/tim/tpics1.html'
Ironically, you really ought to look at them using a mode with more than
256 colours because netscapes dithering (on top of my dithering) looks a little
poor but it's a good algo so they don't look too bad.
----------------------------====================----------------------------
- __o Tim Lewis, 2nd yr computer science, Lancaster uni.
- _`\<,_ Mosaic page: http://cent1.lancs.ac.uk/tim/tmain.html
_ (_) /(_) Email: csc...@cent1.lancs.ac.uk
Snail mail: Grizedale college, Lancaster Uni, N. England. LA14YW
---*** Author of ClayWorks, cool 3d editor for DOS ***---
----------------------------====================----------------------------
Aki M Lumme
: Jonatan Magnusson (jon...@academy.bastad.se) wrote:
: : What is the best way to draw in mode 12h? Both fastest and easiest
: : way.
: If you are really interested in 16 color modes, the best info I have
: been able to find was from the book PC Game Programming Explorer.
: However, 16 color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution. They
: are also slow. If I were you I'd either use mode 13h, mode X (with
: square pixels), or a 256 color SVGA mode.
No, they don't look ugly (subject discussed widely in this newsgroup
so I won't go into that), and no, they are NOT slow. Sure, if you
update the screen pixel by pixel, you'll get slow action, but if
using optimized code, the 16 col may even work faster (?) than the
standard 320x200x256?
But programming those fast routines can be really frustrating... :)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aki Lumme | No animals were harmed in
aml...@cc.helsinki.fi |
www.helsinki.fi/~amlumme | preparation of this message
Taylor Gautier
: If anybody wants a gander at what my humble self could do in fewer colours,
: point your browser at:
: 'http://cent1.lancs.ac.uk/tim/tpics1.html'
Hey, I did. Wow! Those look really great!
You know, I liked many of 32 and 16 color pictures _better_ than the 256
ones.
-Taylor
Taylor Scott Gautier -- tsga...@ucdavis.edu
............................................................................
: the spaces of the mind are :: space extends to infinity :
: _a new dimension_. the body :: outwards :
: is a mere wall between two :: the mind stretches to infinity :
: infinities :: inwards. :
: _the mind parasites_ :
............................................................................
Rainer Deyke
: I disagree, done right, 16 colours can look very good, Syndicate looks far
: better than any mode 13 equiv. More games should use mode 12 IMHO, Star Control
: for instance could have looked far better - Mode 12 presents over twice the
: graphic detail as mode 13 and it shows, you just need an artist who can choose
: the palette wisely.
: Sure there are a lot of games in 16 colours that look bad, but there are a lot
: of games you can run on a 486 that look bad - this doesn't mean you can't
: run good ones. Gods (I think thats the name(?)) for instance looks like a
: [good] 256 colour game (better infact than many other 256 colour games).
: Note that EGA games dont count as you dont have an 18bit palette to choose your
: colours from like you do with mode 12 so EGA games generally do look ugly.
: Some games use the default palette, this is certain death visually. Make sure
: you are not judging 16cols on games like these.
: Check out the delux version of Carmen Sandiago - it's almost
: photo-realistic. I've seen a 16col tile game that had a sort of photo-realistic
: feel as well (used mainly greys and browns, like Syndicate).
: Of course SVGA is much better. Just avoid 320x200 at all costs unless you need
: it low res for a high frame rate. Dont be a lazy bum and use 320x200 cause it's
: there or because everyone else does, game like that really bother me :)
: Remember... 640x480x16 gives over twice the detail. (And as far as I've seen,
: used right it looks much better than 320x200 used right. (depending on the sort
: of game of course) ie the detail *does* tanslate to image quality)
I maintain that mode 13h is better than mode 12h. In fact I'd rather
have 24 bits at 320x200 than 8 bits or lower at ANY resolution. The
only real option for a 16 color palette is the default palette, since
any other palette would leave out vital shades. (Of course you could
simply use 16 shades of grey, but then you can't draw anything that is
not grey.) That is not to say that 256 colors translate into great
graphics (You'd need at least 15 bits for that :-)). I've seen plenty
of EGA games that look better than some VGA games. However, if you
want even minimal color detail in 16 color modes, you have to use
a lot of dithering. There's nothing wrong with dithering in theory,
most 256 color games use dithering, but with only 16 colors the
average difference between any two colors is so great that dithering
looks just plain ugly. That means that you have to stick with 16
colors without dithering. That means no shading, no realistic shadows,
... The main weakness of 256 color modes is that many artists can't
effectively use them, because most paint programs don't support that
level of color detail and there are too few colors to get good results
from ray-tracing or scanning in hand-painted pictures. That's where
15, 16, and 24 bit modes come in.
Todd David Rudick
> have 24 bits at 320x200 than 8 bits or lower at ANY resolution. The
> only real option for a 16 color palette is the default palette, since
> any other palette would leave out vital shades. (Of course you could
> simply use 16 shades of grey, but then you can't draw anything that is
> not grey.)
You can also do 4 colors at 4 levels of brightness.. it looks great,
and can be used very easily for many types of games (once again, check
out "Out of this World") Not every kind of game needs bright magenta. :)
Martoon
to register? Like Scott, I need a library for this mode that does line
drawing. I also need it to do virtual page swapping. In response to
those who inevitably reply, "No, no, what you really want is mode X or
mode 13h," you may want to consider that not everyone is writing texture
mapped games, or even bit-mapped for that purpose. Personally, I'm doing
vector style graphics, and the lines look MUCH better in hi-res with 16
colors than they do in lo-res with 256.
Right now, I'm using the graphics that come with Watcom 10.0. They
support 640x480x16 VGA, but not virtual pages. As a result, my lines
flicker horrendously when I animate them.
So, is there any library or source code out there that will do this for
me?
Thanks,
Marty
Seth Robert Segall, Ph.D.
>From: Todd David Rudick <rud...@CS.Arizona.EDU>
>Subject: Re: 640x480x16
>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 1995 00:17:39 -0700
>On 17 Aug 1995, Rainer Deyke wrote:
>> have 24 bits at 320x200 than 8 bits or lower at ANY resolution. The
>> only real option for a 16 color palette is the default palette, since
>> any other palette would leave out vital shades. (Of course you could
>> simply use 16 shades of grey, but then you can't draw anything that is
>> not grey.)
> You can also do 4 colors at 4 levels of brightness.. it looks great,
>and can be used very easily for many types of games (once again, check
>out "Out of this World") Not every kind of game needs bright magenta. :)
It's all a matter of the type of game, and useful the mode is to the game.
Out of This World was an awesome game, but it just was polygons, and could
easily be used in 16 color mode. I think some of the early 16-color Sierra
games are far superior to their new games, just because of their
ingenuity.
However, anything with shadows, lighting, and or/lots of different types of
images would need at least 256 colors. Like--dare I say it?--Doom. I agree
that on larger screens, 320x200 starts to suck, but on a 14-inch monitor, it
looks fine most of the time.
Basically, it all comes down to the artist/programmer: A good artist can make
16-colors look incredible in lots of situations, but it can also look
horrible. Also, a good artist can make 320x200x256 look awesome regardless of
resolution, but if he/she doesn't do it right it will again be horrible.
- Josh Segall
Rainer Deyke
: Rainer Deyke (rai...@deyke3.fc.hp.com) wrote:
: : If you are really interested in 16 color modes, the best info I have
: : been able to find was from the book PC Game Programming Explorer.
: : However, 16 color graphics look ugly, even at high resolution. They
: : are also slow. If I were you I'd either use mode 13h, mode X (with
: : square pixels), or a 256 color SVGA mode.
: No, they don't look ugly (subject discussed widely in this newsgroup
: so I won't go into that), and no, they are NOT slow. Sure, if you
: update the screen pixel by pixel, you'll get slow action, but if
: using optimized code, the 16 col may even work faster (?) than the
: standard 320x200x256?
16 colors at a high (640x480) resolution will always be slower than a
320x200 256 color mode. Some of the tricks for increasing 16 color
speed are availible in mode X, and mode 13h is still usually faster.
You don't have to update the screen pixel by pixel in mode 13h either.
FELDMAN HOWARD JONATHAN
ou're not the first one to want this - I desparately do as well. As yo said, if you ask the Shmuks in this newsgroup, they'll just say Use Mode X, its the best, blah blah. And mode 12h sucks, they say. Anyway, with standard VGA, there
simply isnt enough memory for 2 pages at this resolution. You have 2 options:
use nonstandard 640x400x16 if this is close enough for you - this supports 2
pages. The other option which is quite neat, is only page flip up to the
first 340 scan lines!!! Yes, this IS possible. If the bottom of the screen
just has scores and shit, then this works great!!! It IS a little trickier
to program of course, but can be done with a bit of .ASM. If you want to
know how to do this, ask Michael Abrash though, not me.
--
----------------------------------------------
Howard Feldman
Author of The Search for Freedom
and many other useful but unheard of things
Ian Ward
> In article <4117qt$2...@duck.inetnebr.com>,
> Martoon <mra...@herbie.unl.edu> wrote:
> >Right now, I'm using the graphics that come with Watcom 10.0. They
> >support 640x480x16 VGA, but not virtual pages. As a result, my lines
> >flicker horrendously when I animate them.
> >
> >So, is there any library or source code out there that will do this for
> >me?
> >
> simply isnt enough memory for 2 pages at this resolution. You have 2 options:
> use nonstandard 640x400x16 if this is close enough for you - this supports 2
> pages. The other option which is quite neat, is only page flip up to the
> first 340 scan lines!!! Yes, this IS possible. If the bottom of the screen
> just has scores and shit, then this works great!!! It IS a little trickier
> to program of course, but can be done with a bit of .ASM. If you want to
> know how to do this, ask Michael Abrash though, not me.
unfortunatly, if you use that method in Mode-12h you're only left with
a little more than half your screen to animate on. I've also seen
people telling the VGA to draw a screen cut off slightly on the top
and bottom (sort-of-panoramic/movie style screen) But there are very
few VGA implimentations that actually let you do this.
It's an interesting question... anyone have any other ideas?
Todd David Rudick
> 16 colors at a high (640x480) resolution will always be slower than a
> 320x200 256 color mode.
Slower per pixel or per redraw?
Obviously it'll be slower per pixel--you're writing to quite a bit more
memory.
Ian Ward
> 16 colors at a high (640x480) resolution will always be slower than a
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 320x200 256 color mode. Some of the tricks for increasing 16 color
> speed are availible in mode X, and mode 13h is still usually faster.
> You don't have to update the screen pixel by pixel in mode 13h either.
That all depends on what you're doing and how you're doing it.
A video mode that's best for everything simply doesn't exist. The
high-res low-color modes are great if you're using limited hues and
lots of text, whereas the 256 color modes are lousy at text (even when
anti-aliased) but great for graphics and speed.
Re: 13h still usually faster: Yeah, whatever.
Rainer Deyke
: > have 24 bits at 320x200 than 8 bits or lower at ANY resolution. The
: > only real option for a 16 color palette is the default palette, since
: > any other palette would leave out vital shades. (Of course you could
: > simply use 16 shades of grey, but then you can't draw anything that is
: > not grey.)
: You can also do 4 colors at 4 levels of brightness.. it looks great,
: and can be used very easily for many types of games (once again, check
: out "Out of this World") Not every kind of game needs bright magenta. :)
Well, I guess it highly depends on the game. A screen-based game where
every screen has a different palette might work in 16 colors, since
most screens would use very few distinct colors when dithering is used.
However, I would not want to be stuck without any bright magenta in the
whole game. Every color has its uses.
Paul Kahler
: FELDMAN HOWARD JONATHAN (fel...@ecf.toronto.edu) wrote:
: > In article <4117qt$2...@duck.inetnebr.com>,
: > Martoon <mra...@herbie.unl.edu> wrote:
: [...]
: > >Right now, I'm using the graphics that come with Watcom 10.0. They
: > >support 640x480x16 VGA, but not virtual pages. As a result, my lines
: > >flicker horrendously when I animate them.
I have the had similar problems. When I did my Asteroids clone I simply
did a erase-move-draw for each object on the screen. This worked quite
well using Turbo Pascal and the stock Borland .bgi driver. However I am
now working on a project where I don't have a say in what order the lines
get drawn/erased. I must store all the vector data and then erase ALL the
lines from one frame and then draw ALL the lines for the new frame. I tried
doing drawing and erasing in the same loop, letting the erase portion get
about 12-24 vectors ahead of the drawing. That way an object is likely to
get completely erased before any new lines (for it) are drawn, while not
waiting for the entire frame before it reappears. This worked well but
when objects appear or change drawing order you get BAD flicker as the
draw may occure before the erase for that frame! As I said I have NO
control over the drawing order (I'm emulating arcade games) so I still need
another solution. XORing would work nice because you could allocate 2
palette entries for the same color (er make that 3). Then you could draw
one frame in color 1 while erasing the old frame which was color 2. There
would be times when some pixels had a value of 3... This would also let me
play tricks to emulate the colored screen overlay for Star Castle and some
other things. I'm gonna get Win95 next week and see what they have, I seem
to recall them having support for XOR though it's probably slow.
___ __ _ _ _
| \ / \ | | | || | phka...@oakland.edu Engineer/Programmer
| _/| || || |_| || |__ " What makes someone care so much?
|_| |_||_| \___/ |____) for things another man can just ignore. " -S.H.
Robinson
rai...@deyke3.fc.hp.com writes:
>have 24 bits at 320x200 than 8 bits or lower at ANY resolution. The
>only real option for a 16 color palette is the default palette, since
>any other palette would leave out vital shades. (Of course
Take a look at Duke Nukem 2. Its pal was something like this:
3 whites
3 blues
3 greens
3 reds
1 black
+3 misc. colors.
It looked VERY good, and very high rez. (640X480X16 I think).
Go on, take a look. The game almost looks 256, as the first few intro
screens are in 256. It took me a day before I realized it was in 16!
-=> AER.
Ian Ward
> >Basically, it all comes down to the artist/programmer: A good artist can make
> >16-colors look incredible in lots of situations, but it can also look
> >horrible. Also, a good artist can make 320x200x256 look
> But a bad artist can make 320X200 look ok, but would have no hope in 16
> color mode.
No, no, no.. What little faith you have in bad artists.. I've seen
some horrendous 320x200x256 graphics! ( have a look at "doom3"--a
really mutilated version of doom done by some "ELiT3" children )
Robinson
seg...@minerva.cis.yale.edu writes:
>However, anything with shadows, lighting, and or/lots of different types of
>images would need at least 256 colors. Like--dare I say it?--Doom. I agree
Doom needs more then 256, either that, or a better pal.
>that on larger screens, 320x200 starts to suck, but on a 14-inch monitor, it
>looks fine most of the time.
Even on a 17" 320X200 looks ok. I depends on the image. A game like
doom looks blocky, but a still looks great!
Dr. Cat
the VGA modes, yes, you can do great stuff in it and it has some
significant advantages over 320*200*256. Mostly, though, I think this is
a dead issue 'cause most serious game developers should be moving to
Super VGA modes now. Unless you're doing really demanding fast animation
there isn't much reason not to use 640*480*256 at least. And even the
fast games are getting more and more practical with CPUs continuing
to speed up and all.
If anyone wants to see what a couple of really good artists can do with
640*480*16, you can take a peek at the stuff we put together that's over on
ftp.crl.com in users/dr/drcat. Don't look unless you're 18 or over,
though. ;X)
***********************************************************************
Dr. Cat / Dragon's Eye Productions ** Come play DragonSpires!
******************************************** ftp.eden.com pub/dspire
Dragonspires is a graphic mud for PCs. ** has everything you need!
***********************************************************************
** http://www.realtime.net/~gauntlet/dspire.html for more info **
***********************************************************************
Walter Scheepens
: c...@eden.com (Dr. Cat) wrote:
: >I did a bunch of work in 640*480*16. Yes, it's generally the slowest of
: >significant advantages over 320*200*256. Mostly, though, I think this is
640x480 (or in my case 640x400) can be usefull and can really look good.
Have a look at Syndicate or Populous II pc versions. They look really good.
I am currently writing a platform game engine for 640x400x16. Most modex
stuff also works for 16 colour modes.
But indeed why take the trouble of making complex 16 colour routines when
the high resolution 256 colour modes can do just as good and perhaps even
better. 16 colour games hae nearly died out already. 256 colours just look
much better. I just use 16 colour modes 'cause they're fun to hack around
with.
: To see great 640X480X16 stuff just check out any of a huge number of old
: Amiga games that rocked extremely hard.
You didn't get that resolution quite right. But most amiga games were in
320x200 16 or 32 colour mode or 320x256 16 or 32 (or 64 sometimes). And when
the amiga 1200 came everyone abondoned 16 colour modes right away. (please
correct me if I'm wrong but don't post just to do that)
: Although I think it's a dead issue because of the Win95 games migration
: (all sigh).
Yeah... Oh well. Perhaps it will look good after all (although I'm not
looking forward to using Win'95)
- WalterS.
Sorry... no cool .sig :)
j...@ponder.csci.unt.edu
>I did a bunch of work in 640*480*16. Yes, it's generally the slowest of
>the VGA modes, yes, you can do great stuff in it and it has some
>significant advantages over 320*200*256. Mostly, though, I think this is
To see great 640X480X16 stuff just check out any of a huge number of old
Amiga games that rocked extremely hard.
Although I think it's a dead issue because of the Win95 games migration
(all sigh).
Ciao...
(don't have a sig yet - doing ppp on a new os)
Rainer Deyke
: Rainer Deyke (rai...@deyke3.fc.hp.com) wrote:
I didn't say mode 13h. I said 320x200 at 256 colors. There's still
mode Y (which is mode X at 320x200). Mode 13h itself can be pretty
fast if you use a dirty rectangles / dirty tiles technique.
Donald K. Forbes
>Right now, I'm using the graphics that come with Watcom 10.0. They
>support 640x480x16 VGA, but not virtual pages. As a result, my lines
>flicker horrendously when I animate them.
>So, is there any library or source code out there that will do this for
>me?
Just set the video page yourself:
ah = 0x05
al = page number
int 10
------------------------------------------------------------
Donald K. Forbes e-mail: d...@mythos.com
_ _ ____ ___ ___
/ / //__/ / /__// //__
/ / / / / //__/___/ Software, Inc.
My opinions are mine and not necessarily that of my employer
------------------------------------------------------------
FELDMAN HOWARD JONATHAN
afraid its not so simple. 1 mode 12h page takes up 38K, while VGA has only
64K at its disposal. Do the math - it just isn't possible.. at least, not
possible to do FULL PAGE flipping...