 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alessio Sangalli wrote:
> stevenvh wrote:
>
>> No, it's clear now. But as you say, this only works with an orthographic
>> projection. That's not often the case in my projects, in this special case it's
>> even a fisheye.
>
>
> I think the idea was to use the orthographic only in this final rendering.
>
> Anyway I would just use the gimp, SAVE the images, and then open them in
> photoshop and paste everything together, what's difficult on this?
It can be a tedious process, manually selecting the black area from the
image in each segment. An area selection would help this process along,
though it wouldn't work too well if the image contained pure black areas
within the rendered portion.
I just thought it would be easier in the long run to have POV-Ray do all
the work, especially if rendering scenes in segments becomes a habit ;)
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> GIMP shows the non-rendered area as black, so the simple trick won't do.
Are you sure you're writing to a format that supports transparency?
Specifying a filename that ends in .png isn't sufficient. You need to set
the output file type to PNG or else you're just writing a bitmap file with a
.png extension. The ini file you put in your other post doesn't have the
output file type specified.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alessio Sangalli <ale### [at] manoweb com> wrote:
> Anyway I would just use the gimp, SAVE the images, and then open them in
> photoshop and paste everything together, what's difficult on this?
>
That, because of POV-Ray's messing with the file format, I have to use two (2)
image editors. Should be easier, and preferably automated. Isn't that why
POV-Ray adds the extra info to the partial images in the first place?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Slime" <fak### [at] emailaddress> wrote:
> > GIMP shows the non-rendered area as black, so the simple trick won't do.
>
> Are you sure you're writing to a format that supports transparency?
> Specifying a filename that ends in .png isn't sufficient. You need to set
> the output file type to PNG or else you're just writing a bitmap file with a
> .png extension. The ini file you put in your other post doesn't have the
> output file type specified.
I know that. I have "Output_File_Type=N" in my povray.ini.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stevenvh wrote:
> Alessio Sangalli <ale### [at] manowebcom> wrote:
>
>> Anyway I would just use the gimp, SAVE the images, and then open them in
>> photoshop and paste everything together, what's difficult on this?
>>
>
> That, because of POV-Ray's messing with the file format, I have to use two (2)
> image editors.
Yes I know, and one of those editors suck in opening images. That is why
I suggested to open with the gimp, save the partial images as new
images, and then open with photoshop
> Should be easier, and preferably automated. Isn't that why
> POV-Ray adds the extra info to the partial images in the first place?
gimp can be automated to perform all of this for you. Anyway, have you
tried what Slime suggested? Alternatively, can you upload one of those
"broken" partial images you have problems with?
bye
as
PS how much time a full rendering takes?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alessio Sangalli wrote in message <48744443@news.povray.org>:
> Anyway I would just use the gimp, SAVE the images, and then open them in
> photoshop and paste everything together, what's difficult on this?
Why in the world would you suggest to quit Gimp and start another bloatware
that does the same work.
I can understand when people argue that photoshop is better for complex
image manipulations, and indeed there are missing features in Gimp (on the
other hand, the scripting languages are far better IMHO), but tu copy-paste
rectangles, that is just nonsense.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"stevenvh" wrote in message
<web.487371a8ec7fa205c0721a1d0@news.povray.org>:
> I made a set of partial images using Start_Column, End_Column, Start_Row and
> End_Row.
> Now I want to combine them, but Photoshop can't read the images. Are the files
> not standard bitmap files (PNG in my case)?
> Any tools around to do this?
position (10,16) from it, pastes it into target.png at position (32,64) and
saves the result as target-new.png. It does not choke if source.png is
truncated.
use Gtk2;
my $load = Gtk2::Gdk::PixbufLoader->new;
my $input = do {
open my $if, "<", "source.png" or die "source.png: $!\n";
local $/;
<$if>;
};
$load->write($input);
my $src = $load->get_pixbuf;
my $dst = Gtk2::Gdk::Pixbuf->new_from_file("target.png");
$src->copy_area(10, 16, 420, 160, $dst, 32, 64);
$dst->save("target-new.png", "png", compression => 9);
$load->close;
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas George <nicolas$george@salle-s.org> wrote:
>
> I can understand when people argue that photoshop is better for complex
> image manipulations, and indeed there are missing features in Gimp (on the
> other hand, the scripting languages are far better IMHO), but tu copy-paste
> rectangles, that is just nonsense.
I don't have anything against GIMP, but I usually work with Photoshop. I just
installed GIMP this week, and I know virtually nothing about it. I don't doubt
that GIMP may be better than PS for some jobs.
Can you explain to me quickly how I could script this combining job? No "RTFM",
please. :-)
TIA
Steven
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"stevenvh" wrote in message
<web.487485687ec83d1bc0721a1d0@news.povray.org>:
> Can you explain to me quickly how I could script this combining job? No
> "RTFM", please. :-)
With Gimp, I could not explain: I experimented with its scripting facilities
a very long time ago, I just remember that it was quite agreeable to work
with.
I posted half an hour ago a message showing how to do the trick with Perl
and GdkPixbuf. Hope this helps.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"stevenvh" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> I see GIMP allows you to select areas numerically. Great. So now I can select
> the partial image, and paste it in Photoshop. I still want to do this in
> Photoshop because of its magnetic placement feature. I don't know if GIMP has
> this too.
Try opening your images in XnView. It allows you to do batch operations such as
cropping and compositing into a single, larger image (called a "Contact Sheet"
in XnView).
Alternately, try ImageMagick. It's a command-line tool that, though more
powerful, takes a while to learn the ropes on.
-Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
