I have a new experiment in which I am using a total of about 2000 color images.  Currently, I have the images saved as BMP files, so the images take up about 5.5 GB -- and Inquisit chokes on the script when I try to run it.

Thus, I need to convert my images to a format that will have smaller file sizes.

I would prefer to convert the images to PNGs so that I don't lose quality.  Is there a way to use PNG "pictures" in Inquisit?  I could convert to JPG if absolutely necessary, but I strongly prefer to stick with a lossless file format.  Any change Inquisit is heading towards PNG support?

-Josh

I can't speak to the matter of future PNG support, but I believe that this is actually of minor relevance in this case. Here's why: AFAIK, Inquisit converts all picture files to a native display format when parsing a script. So it doesn't actually matter whether your  source files are BMP's or JPG's -- when parsed they'll take up the same amount of memory. The only difference between compressed (JPG) and uncompressed (BMP) source files should be a (slightly) longer parsing time for compressed files as Inquisit needs some time to expand them to its native display format. Bottom line: With 2000 picture files (that's a whole lot!), Inquisit will probably choke your system regardless of the source format. Any chance you can reduce the amount of pictures?

Best wishes from a fellow Inquisit user,

~Dave

EDIT: Here are a few related forum threads:

http://www.millisecond.com/forums/Topic3153.aspx

http://www.millisecond.com/forums/Topic1769.aspx#1769

Dave's correct - converting to another image format won't make any difference. If you reduced the actual height and width of the pictures, that would help, however.

I would expect it to take a while for Inquisit to process the pictures,
but unless it runs out of memory, it should eventually succeed. When you say that Inquisit "chokes", what exactly happens?

-Sean