I have an image when manually resized to width 1000pts the resolution comes to 261.5pixels/inch
Original Image Dimensions
Manual Update width to 1000pts
The resolution downgraded to 261.5 px/in
When i try the same programmatically with js script the width changes but resolution is same as of the original image
JS Code
document.resizeImage(UnitValue(parseInt(row.width),"pt"), null, null); //working
where row.width = 1000
Image dimensions after executing the js script
How to calculate the resolution of the image automatically and set to 261.5px/inch
The new resolution should be manually calculated.
newResolution = document.resolution * (originalWidth / parseInt(row.width));
document.resizeImage(null, null, newResolution, ResampleMethod.NONE);
document.resizeImage(UnitValue(parseInt(row.width), "pt"), null, null);
If the width is changed, the height will be changed programatically, which caused an impression, ResampleMethod.NONE will set the resolution too.
Not sure if you want to shrink the image or the canvas. I've got with the former.
Use app.activeDocument.resizeImage with a width, height and resolution of your image.
resizemeth = ResampleMethod.BICUBIC;
res = 72;
w = 1000;
h = 673;
app.activeDocument.resizeImage(w, h, res, resizemeth);
Also check what units you are using.
alert(app.preferences.rulerUnits);
Related
In Lightroom, I can resize images to a pixel value for the long side. That way if, for example, an image is five times as tall as it is wide, and I asked for a 2,000px (long side) image, the result will be 2000x400px. Not 10,000x2,000px.
In other words, the aspect ratio is maintained, and 2,000px is a limiter.
Can sharp do this, and maintain the aspect ratio -- when I don't know in advance whether the height or the width will be greater?
Otherwise I will have to pull the exif data from the images so that I know in advance which is greater, and can resize based on the greater side (width or height). I am trying to avoid this step.
Below is my current code and it creates 300x300 images, ignoring the aspect ratio. However the desired result is:
300x200 images, when given images whose aspect ratio is 3:2
200x300 images, when given images whose aspect ratio is 2:3.
etc.
exports.resizeResolutions = {
mapThumbnail: {x: 300, y: 300},
}
exports.fitMethods = {
inside: "inside",
}
proc = sharp(path.join(pathToLocalFSGalleries, folder, file),
{ fit: fitMethods.inside }).resize(resizeResolutions.mapThumbnail.x, resizeResolutions.mapThumbnail.y);
await proc.toFile(path.join(pathToThumbnails, folder, file));
Currently, the way Fabric.js works as far as I can tell is that its filters are applied to the original image, regardless of what it looks like on the canvas. Is there a way, by either "branching" the pixelate filter or through some other method, to have the filter be applied to the image as shown on the canvas, resized and oriented? How would I do this?
An example: I have an image within the canvas that can be resized. The user resizes it. I want to apply a filter to the resized version of that image, not the original uploaded image.
Thank you!
Okay, I think I see what you're trying to do. Assuming you're using the pixelate filter and want to get a consistent blocksize regardless of how big the image is on the canvas, you could simply set the filter's block size value as a function of the image's scale. By putting the blocksize calculation in an object:modified event it will recalculate each time an image is modified.
canvas.on('object:modified', function(e) {
var obj = e.target;
if(obj.type == "image") {
var blocksize = 16 / obj.scaleX;
obj.filters[0].blocksize = blocksize;
obj.applyFilters();
}
});
I am trying to used the seamsless cloning to blend to image together.
but I notice that after using the seamsless clone function the area in the
mask that I want to transfer is shift upward. So I have a question that
is this a normal behaviour of the seamsless clone function or it is a bug
on my implementation.
Here are the Source photo
Here are the destination photo
Here are the result photo
I encountered similar situation. Moreover, like #JoshuaCWebDeveloper noted, this shift disappeared when all one mask is used. Nevertheless, I got a fix for this. What I did is this. I cropped valid mask (non-zero sub-section) out using cv2.boundingRect. So my source image and mask image are reduced to a smaller size, while center is now calculated from boundingRect outputs (Since reference point is marked on destination image). This way, error got solved/shift got ridden.
(Based on the answer posted by Fractalic Forieu) You can achieve the same result without reducing the image size.
Instead of using the image center:
center = (width // 2, height // 2)
poissonImage = cv2.seamlessClone(srcImage, dstImage, maskImage, center)
use the center of the bounding rect:
monoMaskImage = cv2.split(maskImage)[0] # reducing the mask to a monochrome
br = cv2.boundingRect(monoMaskImage) # bounding rect (x,y,width,height)
centerOfBR = (br[0] + br[2] // 2, br[1] + br[3] // 2)
poissonImage = cv2.seamlessClone(srcImage, dstImage, maskImage, centerOfBR )
I must be missing something...why isn't this working? Instead of clipping to the circle the entire 800x800 backdrop image is displayed...
var mask;
var img;
function preload() {
game.load.image('back', 'backdrop.jpg');
}
function create() {
img = game.add.image(game.world.centerX, game.world.centerY,'back').anchor.setTo(0.5);
mask = game.add.graphics(0, 0);
mask.beginFill(0xffffff);
mask.drawCircle(game.world.centerX, game.world.centerY, 600);
img.mask = mask;
}
jsfiddle here
Disclaimer: I have no formal experience in phaser.io
I was able to fix this in your fiddle by changing
img = game.add.image(game.world.centerX, game.world.centerY,'back').anchor.setTo(0.5);
to
img = game.add.image(0, 0, 'back');
JSFiddle Fork
I would assume that placing the image in the centerX,centerY position results in the mask being offset of the image. Hopefully someone with more experience than I could explain the specifics here, but I will research further and update my answer as I figure out the why to go along with the how.
Update
Okay so I've done some digging through the documentation. First, you want to use img = game.add.image(0, 0, 'back'); due to the fact that the x and y parameters in this case dictate the upper-left origin of the image, not the center. By using game.world.centerX and game.world.centerY you are trying to throw the background image to the center of the canvas even though the canvas is the same size as the image.
using .anchor.setTo(0.5) from what I can gather, is attempting to set the anchor point at which the image originates to the centerX position. However, when you remove this anchor, suddenly the mask works, even though it is not showing correctly (because the position of the background image is incorrect).
Theory - By anchoring the image, I believe that it is no longer possible to apply a mask to it. By all experimenting that I've done, having an anchor set on the background image prevents it from being masked, so the mask simply is added as a child to img and is placed as it's center, thus why you are seeing the white circle instead of the circle properly masking the image.
it appears I was a mistaken about the fluidity of the api in trying to chain that last function call... if I break it up:
img = game.add.image(game.world.centerX, game.world.centerY, 'back');
img.anchor.setTo(0.5);
it now works!
Fiddle Here
In my j2me App I have tried canvas which works great on Nokia phone but doesn't run on samsung. For that I have to switch to some FORM which in both cases works but only issue is of size, if I create smaller image to fit for both phone screens, one (samsung) shows that ok but other (nokia) leaves a lot more space and vice versa.
I need to have code that could stretch my image and just fix if to the screen size which I basically get by form.getHeight() and form.getWidth() property. I wonder if there is property of Image.createImage(width, height) then why doesn't it stretch it to the value I provide?
my code for that is below
try {
System.out.println("Height: " + displayForm.getHeight());
System.out.println("Width: " + displayForm.getWidth());
Image img1 = Image.createImage("/bur/splashScreen1.PNG");
img1.createImage(displayForm.getHeight(), displayForm.getWidth());
displayForm.append(new ImageItem(null, img1, Item.LAYOUT_CENTER, null));
} catch (Exception ex) {
}
Image
A single image will not fit all screens. But more will do.
The smaller logo image should be less than 96x54, as this is the smallest screen resolution. This image can be used up to the resolution of 128x128 without problems. With bigger resolutions it will look tiny, though.
The bigger logo image should be a bit bigger than 128x128 and can be used up to 240x320.
The code bellow gives as example of how to implement this.
import javax.microedition.lcdui.Image;
import javax.microedition.lcdui.Graphics;
class Splash extends javax.microedition.lcdui.Canvas {
Image logo;
Splash () {
if (getWidth() <= 128) {
// sl stands for Small Logo and does not need to have a file extension
// this will use less space on the jar file
logo = Image.createImage("/sl");
} else {
// bl stands for Big Logo
logo = Image.createImage("/bl");
}
}
protected void paint (Graphics g) {
// With these anchors your logo image will be drawn on the center of the screen.
g.drawImage(logo, getWidth()/2, getHeight()/2, Graphics.HCENTER | Graphics.VCENTER);
}
}
As seen in http://smallandadaptive.blogspot.com.br/2008/10/showing-splash.html
wonder if there is property of Image.createImage(width, height) then why doesn't it stretch it to the value I provide?
Parameters in this method have nothing to do with stretching, see API javadocs:
public static Image createImage(int width, int height)
Creates a new, mutable image for off-screen drawing.
Every pixel within the newly created image is white.
The width and height of the image must both be greater than zero.
Parameters:
width - the width of the new image, in pixels
height - the height of the new image, in pixels
Image class (API javadocs) has two more createImage methods that use parameters called "width" and "height" - one with six, another with four arguments but none of these has anything to do with stretching.
In createImage with six arguments, width and height specify size of the region to be copied (without stretching) from source image.
In method with four arguments, width and height specify how to interpret source ARGB array, without these it would be impossible to find out if, say, array of 12 values represents 3x4 image or 4x3. Again, this has nothing to do with stretching.