I have a plantUml diagram that looks like this:
The image has a width of 1234px and a height of 970px. I need to print the image as part of a report and would like to fit it on a letter sized sheet of paper in portrait orientation.
If I could set the max width of 900px it would fit better in my report. I don't mind if the diagram becomes significantly longer/taller.
I have tried using various combinations of
scale 200 width
scale 700 height
But as per the doc, this doesn't do what I want:
You can use the scale command to zoom the generated image.
You can use either a number or a fraction to define the scale factor.
You can also specify either width or height (in pixel). And you can
also give both width and height : the image is scaled to fit inside
the specified dimension.
How can I set a max width for my diagram, without changing the font sizes used or constraining the height allowed for my diagram.
I'd go a different route with this. Create the diagram however you please and use the dpi skinparam to scale the image up or down when printing, for instance skinparam dpi 300
The default is 96 dpi but I've had to go up to as much as 600 to get a decent result.
Related
I am new in godot engine and I am trying to make mobile game (portrait mode only). I would like to make background image fit screen size. How do I do that? Do i have to import images with specific sizes and implement them all for various screens? If I import image to big, it will just cut out parts that don't fit screen.
Also, while developing, which width and height values should I use for these purposes?
With Godot 3, I am able to set size and position of sprite / other UI elements using script. I am not using the stretch mode for display window.
Here is how you can easily make the sprite to match viewport size -
var viewportWidth = get_viewport().size.x
var viewportHeight = get_viewport().size.y
var scale = viewportWidth / $Sprite.texture.get_size().x
# Optional: Center the sprite, required only if the sprite's Offset>Centered checkbox is set
$Sprite.set_position(Vector2(viewportWidth/2, viewportHeight/2))
# Set same scale value horizontally/vertically to maintain aspect ratio
# If however you don't want to maintain aspect ratio, simply set different
# scale along x and y
$Sprite.set_scale(Vector2(scale, scale))
Also for targeting mobile devices I would suggest importing a PNG of size 1080x1920 (you said portrait).
Working with different screen sizes is always a bit complicated. Especially for mobile games due to the different screen sizes, resolutions and aspect ratios.
The easiest way I can think of, is scaling of the viewport. Keep in mind that your root node is always a viewport. In Godot you can stretch the viewport in the project settings (you have to enable the stretch mode option). You can find a nice little tutorial here.
However, viewport stretching might result in an image distortion or black bars at the edges.
Another elegant approach would be to create an image that is larger than you viewport and just define an area that has to be shown on every device no matter whats the resolution. Here is someone showing what I am meaning.
I can't really answer your second question about the optimal width and height but I would look for the most typical mobile phone resolutions and ratios and go with that settings. In the end you probably should start with using the width and height ratio of the phone you want to use for testing and debugging.
Hope that helps.
I'm trying to design a Userform in Excel 2010, and I'm coming across a very annoying stumbling block where as I'm trying to move things around, resize them and align them so the form looks appealing.
Unfortunately, different mechanisms are snapping to differently sized grids. For example, drawing a box onto the grid snaps it to multiples of 6, which is the default option found in the Tools> Options> General> Grid units. Resizing these objects snaps it to a seemingly arbitrary grid size that seems to be approximately 7.2 units.
I need these units to match up so I'm not constantly fighting myself getting these grids to function. I don't care what the actual number ends up being, I just need them to be the same. While I'm able to change the grid size, it must be a whole number, which the arbitrary grid is not.
Problem us your units Points <-> Pixels
6 Points * 4/3 points per pixel =>> 8 Pixels .. all good
A nice integer of pixels
Your approx 7.2 I suspect was 7.3333333
Maybe say 11 Points Set gets changed as
* 4/3 => 14.6666 pix Rounded to 15 pix
by 3/4 Pts/pix +> 11.33333
Points as single .. Pixels as integer may be the problem in the math
I read everywhere that resolution is defined by the number of pixels on a screen.
But if you imagine 1000 x 1000 pixels on a screen the size of 20 skyscrapers and compare it to 999 x 999 pixels on a box of matches, the resolution would make the skyscrapers screen look 'low-res' and the box of matches screen look 'high-res'. Instinctively, I would say that the box of matches screen is higher resolution than the skyscrapers screen.
Am I wrong to say this? Is resolution definitely defined by the total number of pixels instead of the dots per inch?
Indeed, in the context of displays, the term resolution says nothing about pixel density. As stated in Wikipedia's article on Display Resolution:
The term "display resolution" is usually used to mean pixel dimensions, the number of pixels in each dimension (e.g. 1920 × 1080), which does not tell anything about the pixel density of the display on which the image is actually formed: broadcast television resolution properly refers to the pixel density, the number of pixels per unit distance or area, not total number of pixels. In digital measurement, the display resolution would be given in pixels per inch (PPI)
Definition of resolution varies according with the context. Every thing has a measurement unit.
When you talk about screens(Monitors), screen has pixels not dots thats why its resolution is measured in Pixels.
And When you talk about printing or video it is all about dots per inch. In your case, Box of Match is not a screen, its on printed paper.
For eg: you might have heard people saying DPI's(not resolution) while scanning documents.
So don't get yourself confused with the definition of resolution that is meant for different context.
I'm working on an application that renders music notation. The musical symbol are specified in regular font files, which use the convention that the height of the em square corresponds to the height of a regular five-line staff of music. For example, the glyph for a note head is approximately 0.25 em high, the distance between two lines of the staff.
When it comes to rendering, I use a coordinate system in which 4 units corresponds to the height of a five-line staff of music. Therefore, I need to render glyphs such that the em square ends up rendered 4 units high. However DirectWrite only allows specifying text size in device independent pixels (DIPs) and I'm confused about how to juggle between the coordinate systems. There are two parts to this:
From a given font size in DIPs I can compute a height in physical pixels, but what is mapped to that height? The em square or some other design-space metric?
What if I'm using some arbitrary transformation matrix? How do I specify DIPs in order to get meaningful values in the coordinate system I am using?
And for good measure:
If get this to work, is this going to mess up font hinting because my DIP values don't have a clear relationship to physical pixels?
After some more experimentation and research, I have come to the following conclusions.
The font size specifies the size of the EM square as drawn. Drawing at 12 DIPs means that the EM square is scaled to use 12 DIPs of vertical space.
The top Y coordinate of the layoutRect parameter of the ID2D1RenderTarget::DrawText function is mapped to the top of the font's ascent (for the first line of text).
The identity matrix gives a coordinate system in which (0, 0) is the top-left and (width, height), as retrieved from ID2D1RenderTarget::GetSize, is the bottom-right, in DIPs. Which means for any transformation matrix, the font size unit should match the unit in the render target's coordinate system and a vertical line of 42 units will be as high as the EM square with a font size of 42 units.
I was unable to find information about the effect of arbitrary transformations on font hinting, however.
I'm working on a UI which needs to work in different aspect ratios, 16:9, 16:10, 4:3
The idea is conceptually simple: Everything is centered to the screen in a rough 4:3 area and anything outside this portion of screen has basic artwork, so something like this:
(not drawn to scale)
Where the pink area represents whre all the UI objects are positioned and the blue area is just background and effects.
The trick is in usability, if I pass in coordinates (0,0) in a 4:3 aspect ratio environment (0,0) would be the top left of the screen. However if I'm in a 16:9 environment (0,0) needs to get renormalized based on the new aspect ratio for it to be in the appropriate place. So my question is: How can I achieve this?
edit: for clarification this is basically for a UI system and while I listed the ratios above as 4:3, 16:9, 16:10 it should be able to dynamically adjust values for whatever aspect ratio it is set to.
edit 2: Just to add more details to the situation: When the positions fo rsetting are passed in they are passed in as a % of the screens current widht height, so basically setting position x would be: [pos x as portion of screen]*SCREEN_WIDTH where screen width is the width of the current screen itself.
The obvious answer seems to be an offset. Since 4x3 is 16x9, it appears you want a 16x9 screen to have 2x9 bands to the left and the right. Hence, the X offset should be (2/16) * width.
For 16x10 screens, the factor is slightly more complicated: 4x3 is 13.33x10, so you have edges of width 1.67, and the X offset should be (1.67/16) * width = (5/48)* width.
So ... Can't you just come up with an abstraction layer, that hides the differences? One idea could be to model a "border" around the active area, that gets added. For 4:3 displays, set the border size to 0 to make the active area cover the full screen.