Search found 168 matches
- 2015-02-25T07:46:51-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Windows portable 'convert -list configure' reports wrong version
- Replies: 3
- Views: 5170
Re: Windows portable 'convert -list configure' reports wrong version
Has anybody looked into this yet?
- 2015-02-23T15:27:27-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Colors for very small JPEG images are way off: bug or feature?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 6250
Re: Colors for very small JPEG images are way off: bug or feature?
That is the nature of JPEG. I know JPEG is lossy.... Bonus answer: No. ...but I don't get this, to be honest. After all, these are only 4 pixels, all in all. So there is no way in JPEG to precisely describe the colors for each single one of only 4 pixels in a very small image, "losslessly"...
- 2015-02-23T03:22:55-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Colors for very small JPEG images are way off: bug or feature?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 6250
Re: Colors for very small JPEG images are way off: bug or feature?
Nevermind... for now I succeeded with a "good enough" result by adding -quality 100% to the JPEG creation commands. Now the resulting color values are: # ImageMagick pixel enumeration: 2,2,255,srgb 0,0: (254,0,0) #FE0000 srgb(254,0,0) 1,0: (0,128,1) #008001 srgb(0,128,1) 0,1: (0,0,254) #00...
- 2015-02-23T03:16:50-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Colors for very small JPEG images are way off: bug or feature?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 6250
Colors for very small JPEG images are way off: bug or feature?
I noticed that JPEGs do have colors which are very far off from the originals, if the image dimensions are very small. (It happened when I scaled down a larger image.) To test this further, I created a very small, 2x2 pixel image with the following command: PNG: convert \ -size 1x1 \ \( xc:red xc:gr...
- 2015-02-16T09:34:50-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Windows portable 'convert -list configure' reports wrong version
- Replies: 3
- Views: 5170
Windows portable 'convert -list configure' reports wrong version
After downloading the portable ImageMagick ZIP file for Windows here: http://www.imagemagick.org/download/binaries/ImageMagick-6.9.0-6-Q16-x86-windows.zip and copying its content to c:\pa\ I get these contradictionary bits of information when trying to determine the version of the binaries: C:\Users...
- 2015-02-09T07:30:50-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: [RESOLVED] ImageMagick identify crashes with pdf
- Replies: 3
- Views: 7217
Re: ImageMagick identify crashes with pdf
There is no Ghostscript 9.3. The latest released version is v9.15, the upcoming version likely will get named v9.16.lost_in_binary wrote:Thank you. This must be it then, even though I am using the latest version of Ghostscript (9.3) I still get this error.
- 2015-02-06T07:43:40-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: [RESOLVED] ImageMagick identify crashes with pdf
- Replies: 3
- Views: 7217
Re: ImageMagick identify crashes with pdf
For investigating a PDF file, ImageMagick is the totally wrong tool. All ImageMagick commands employ 'delegates' to handle input PDFs. They use Ghostscript first to convert all PDF pages to raster images. Only after that step they take their first look at raster images to do something with it. Not e...
- 2015-02-05T12:11:51-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
- Replies: 14
- Views: 12853
Re: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
I tested a few more (direct) Ghostscript-conversions to raster formats: '-sDEVICE={tiff24nc,png16m,jpeg}' . All these didn't produce the artifact. It's only the 'pngalpha' -device which has the problem. Maybe this is a chance to find a workaround? [*][/b][/color] Provided, your IM has a setup which ...
- 2015-02-05T11:50:48-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
- Replies: 14
- Views: 12853
Re: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
It's clear then: a Ghostscript bug.
- 2015-02-05T08:43:37-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
- Replies: 14
- Views: 12853
Re: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
I added a -density 4800 closeup of one of the arrowheads to the above-mentioned web page. It does look to me as though the little triangle was deliberately drawn there. If so, then all the PDF viewers I tested [*][/color][/b] the input PDF with (apart from Ghostscript-based 'gv'), do have the same ...
- 2015-02-04T14:20:45-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
- Replies: 14
- Views: 12853
Re: Conversion from PDF to PNG contains unwanted artifacts
What 'identify -verbose some.pdf' tells you are many details supposedly about the input PDF which are not relevant at all for the PDF. The reason: identify (as ImageMagick in general) cannot directly handle PDF itself. It uses Ghostscript as its 'delegate' to process input PDF pages and convert them...
- 2015-01-30T08:10:26-07:00
- Forum: Developers
- Topic: New image format BPG -- something for ImageMagick to support?
- Replies: 6
- Views: 13524
Re: New image format BPG -- something for ImageMagick to support?
The current release of ImageMagick can process BPG images under Linux if the BPG binaries are installed. That was fast! Thnk you very much :D (I assume with "current release" you mean v6.9.0-5 to be released sometime soon -- not the v6.9.0-4 released 2015-01-16?) BTW, your last couple of ...
- 2015-01-28T06:29:31-07:00
- Forum: Users
- Topic: can I create a PDF which will always open at zoom 100% ?
- Replies: 2
- Views: 4425
Re: can I create a PDF which will always open at zoom 100% ?
From my rusty memory, the following additional parameter to a Ghostscript command (when running a recent v9.xx version of Ghostscript!) should set the initial view parameters for the viewer: -c "[ /PageMode /UseNone /Page 1 /View [ /XYZ null null 1 ] /PageLayout /SinglePage /DOCVIEW pdfmark&quo...
- 2015-01-22T10:57:05-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Spelling of 'tIME' in output of 'identify -verbose' ?
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3505
Re: Spelling of 'tIME' in output of 'identify -verbose' ?
Oh... Interesting!dlemstra wrote:This might look like a typo but it is the correct spelling of the tag, more info can be found here: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exi ... s/PNG.html
Thanks for the info.
- 2015-01-22T04:15:29-07:00
- Forum: Bugs
- Topic: Spelling of 'tIME' in output of 'identify -verbose' ?
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3505
Spelling of 'tIME' in output of 'identify -verbose' ?
This is a 'MacPorts' installation of ImageMagic on a MacBook: identify -version Version: ImageMagick 6.9.0-0 Q16 x86_64 2014-12-06 http://www.imagemagick.org [....] I've just noticed this weird spelling of 'tIME' in the output of 'identify -verbose'. I wonder if it is just a harmless typo in the sou...