 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Since most all of the image formats support some sort of comment
fields, wouldn't it be nice to take advantage of them? We could have
POV-Ray automatically insert a small text file into each of out images
stating the author's name, copyright notice, etc. This text file would
be created by the user and pointed to by an entry in the master ini
file. If no pointer existed, no text would be inserted into the image.
It would also be nice to mention in the comments which version of
POV-Ray created the image. This might include the platform and
compiler used, as well as the general revision number. Custom versions
of POV-Ray should identify themselves as such, and mention their
version numbers as well. This might help at a later date with trying
to recreate an image, or even with tech support issues. This text info
would NOT be a part of the user's text file mentioned above. It would
be hard coded into povray. It would only be updated with each new
version or custom compile.
Lastly, I recently have been rendering images with the intention of
printing them. For the purposes of printing, it would be nice to
assign a DPI value to the image. Currently, I have to do this in a
graphics editing program. It isn't hard, but it could be taken care of
automatically by POV-Ray. I suppose we would need an entry in the
master ini file for DPI setting. Something like: "Output_DPI=300"
I'm not sure how many of the POV supported formats would support this,
but for those formats that do, I think we should add this feature.
I'd love to hear comments about these ideas.
Later,
Glen Berry
IMP Vice Coordinator, and Communications Director
IMP Website: www.imp.org
My Website: www.ezwv.com/~mclilith/index.html
Email: 7no### [at] ezwv com
(remove the "7" to reply via personal email)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
> POV-Ray automatically insert a small text file into each of out images
> stating the author's name, copyright notice, etc. This text file would
Something like this might help e.g. in the IRTC, but doing it
automatically might be a problem: It could violate the privacy
of the user if he forgets to avoid/delete the comments e.g.
from an indecent or illegal image. Bad things like this
have already happened with user IDs included in MS Word files.
> assign a DPI value to the image. Currently, I have to do this in a
IMHO the DPI value is not a property of the image, but
of the printing process, hardware, requested paper size
etc. Passing the information the other way around
is IMHO more useful (e.g. the printer tells the renderer
how many pixels the image should have in order to fit
on a given sheet with minimal dithering trouble).
> I'm not sure how many of the POV supported formats would support this,
> but for those formats that do, I think we should add this feature.
Modern bitmap formats (at least PNG) support comments,
but reading them requires a nontrivial activity by the
user. I think is would be better to stay portable
and have the creator supply a text file containing the
informations. This is easier to create (at least for
people with DOSen, where PNG is not so widespread yet)
and to read (e.g. in HTML pages).
Ralf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 04:23:05 +0200, Ralf Muschall
<rmu### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>Glen Berry wrote:
>
>> POV-Ray automatically insert a small text file into each of out images
>> stating the author's name, copyright notice, etc. This text file would
>
>Something like this might help e.g. in the IRTC, but doing it
>automatically might be a problem: It could violate the privacy
>of the user if he forgets to avoid/delete the comments e.g.
>from an indecent or illegal image. Bad things like this
>have already happened with user IDs included in MS Word files.
>
Please remember that my suggestion was for a user-created text file. I
believe the MS Word ID numbers were something the program itself
inserted into the file without the user's permission or control. My
idea wouldn't be any invasion of privacy at all. If you are purposely
placing private information into a voluntary, user-defined image
header, you are your own security risk. :)
My intention was largely to maintain the identity of the author and to
assert a copyright statement. True, most people would never see it
because few programs will let you read it, but it could conceivably
help cut down on unauthorized image appropriation and copyright
infringement, especially on the internet. It would give you at least
some evidence that a stolen image file was yours.
If someone wants to create an "anonymous" image file, simply don't
enable the feature in the povray.ini file. It also wouldn't be enabled
by default, because a pointer must be established to the
user-generated text file. Only the user would be able to provide that.
>> assign a DPI value to the image. Currently, I have to do this in a
>
>IMHO the DPI value is not a property of the image, but
>of the printing process, hardware, requested paper size
>etc. Passing the information the other way around
>is IMHO more useful (e.g. the printer tells the renderer
>how many pixels the image should have in order to fit
>on a given sheet with minimal dithering trouble).
>
If by "printer" you mean a person working at a service bureau, you
will be sorely disappointed to learn (as I was) that the *vast*
majority of these individuals can't think in terms of pixels. They
only think in terms of DPI. The number of pixels in an image is nearly
irrelevant to many of them.
True, a basic image file doesn't have to have a DPI value assigned to
it, but all the printers (humans, not hardware) that I have talked to
assume that a DPI value has been attached to an image file. They are
so blind to the concept that an image file has no physical size, it is
almost maddening. Professional graphics programs will alter the DPI
value for an image when adjusting the size for printing and they will
store this value in the image file for future reference. At that
point, even an image file without a DPI field will then have one
added. I would just like to take a short cut and have POV insert this
information at the time of file creation. It shouldn't be hard to add
this. Trust me, when working with a commercial printing service, it
would cut down on the likelihood of errors in the printing order.
>
>Modern bitmap formats (at least PNG) support comments,
>but reading them requires a nontrivial activity by the
>user. I think is would be better to stay portable
>and have the creator supply a text file containing the
>informations. This is easier to create (at least for
>people with DOSen, where PNG is not so widespread yet)
>and to read (e.g. in HTML pages).
>
>Ralf
First, the suggestions weren't meant to provide information that was
easily human-readable and obvious to anyone who viewed the image file.
In the case of copyright assertion, it is actually an asset that the
information is obscured. If it were obvious or supplied as a text file
it would be more likely to be fraudulently altered.
Second, portability is not affected one bit by using these standard,
documented features of the image formats. If you were actually
referring to accessibility instead of portability, please see the
above comment.
Many graphics programs insert information in the images they produce.
Things like headers for copyright, the name of the software used for
creating the image, and other details are implemented in many other
programs. I'd just like for POV to also have these same little
"finishing touches" the other programs have.
Later,
Glen Berry
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry <7no### [at] ezwvcom> wrote in message
<377a5fe3.57417910@news.povray.org>...
>Since most all of the image formats support some sort of comment
>fields, wouldn't it be nice to take advantage of them? We could have
>POV-Ray automatically insert a small text file into each of out images
>stating the author's name, copyright notice, etc. This text file would
>be created by the user and pointed to by an entry in the master ini
>file. If no pointer existed, no text would be inserted into the image.
Another idea for the comment field: a comment keyword in the scene file, or
a #comment text-output stream that is automatically redirected to the image
file comment.
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
> >IMHO the DPI value is not a property of the image, but
> >of the printing process, hardware, requested paper size
> >etc. Passing the information the other way around
> >is IMHO more useful (e.g. the printer tells the renderer
> >how many pixels the image should have in order to fit
> >on a given sheet with minimal dithering trouble).
> >
>
> If by "printer" you mean a person working at a service bureau, you
> will be sorely disappointed to learn (as I was) that the *vast*
> majority of these individuals can't think in terms of pixels. They
> only think in terms of DPI. The number of pixels in an image is nearly
> irrelevant to many of them.
Yes. I always have to import a bitmap into CorelDraw so that i can
assign it a DPI higher than 75. It's the only way i know to get
decent printing.
> >
> >Modern bitmap formats (at least PNG) support comments,
>
> Many graphics programs insert information in the images they produce.
> Things like headers for copyright, the name of the software used for
Either Povwin 3.0 or Povlinux 3.0 (but not both :) outputs a copyright
into TGA. That threw me off for a bit because generated animation
frames would come out different sizes.
--
_,--"
dik `-._ ________-_______ "----
_----'--'--------------------------------'--'----_
//_| | \ dic### [at] buckosoftcom / | |_\\
(_____|_|__= Guilford CT +1.203.458.1727 =__|_|_____)
_\_____=___ http://www.buckosoft.com ___=_____/_
\/-(o)-~~-(o)-~~-(o)-`------'-(o)-~~-(o)-~~-(o)-\/
Early Klingon Poetry:
Wustl, Wustl, ERR RIP MIT BOOT, BIND Wustl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 00:31:14 GMT, Glen Berry wrote:
>Since most all of the image formats support some sort of comment
>fields, wouldn't it be nice to take advantage of them? We could have
>POV-Ray automatically insert a small text file into each of out images
>stating the author's name, copyright notice, etc. This text file would
>be created by the user and pointed to by an entry in the master ini
>file. If no pointer existed, no text would be inserted into the image.
Why not put the text in the .pov file instead? I think that would be
much more flexible. If you have a boilerplate you want to use, just
put it in a #include.
>It would also be nice to mention in the comments which version of
>POV-Ray created the image.
That might be nice. Render settings might be nice, too, but would
probably take up too much space.
>Lastly, I recently have been rendering images with the intention of
>printing them. For the purposes of printing, it would be nice to
>assign a DPI value to the image. Currently, I have to do this in a
>graphics editing program. It isn't hard, but it could be taken care of
>automatically by POV-Ray. I suppose we would need an entry in the
>master ini file for DPI setting. Something like: "Output_DPI=300"
DPI seems like such an American unit of measure. Do Europeans and
other more advanced cultures use a more metricized term?
Also, I'd think it'd be nice to specify the intended physical
dimensions of the image rather than directly specifying the DPI.
Or specify the physical dimensions and the DPI but not the pixels.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30 Jun 1999 09:48:06 -0400, par### [at] fwicom (Ron Parker) wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 00:31:14 GMT, Glen Berry wrote:
>>Since most all of the image formats support some sort of comment
>>fields, wouldn't it be nice to take advantage of them? We could have
>>POV-Ray automatically insert a small text file into each of out images
>>stating the author's name, copyright notice, etc. This text file would
>>be created by the user and pointed to by an entry in the master ini
>>file. If no pointer existed, no text would be inserted into the image.
>
>Why not put the text in the .pov file instead? I think that would be
>much more flexible. If you have a boilerplate you want to use, just
>put it in a #include.
That suits me fine. The ini file idea was just the first to come to
mind. Of course you would need a new keyword to identify which part of
the pov file went into the user's name and copyright header, but that
is no problem. (I only wish I had the skills and proper compiler to
try it myself.)
>
>>It would also be nice to mention in the comments which version of
>>POV-Ray created the image.
>
>That might be nice. Render settings might be nice, too, but would
>probably take up too much space.
Yeah, I'm thinking of a short ID header here to save space. I suppose
one could offer a "verbose" option, but I'm not sure it would be worth
the trouble.
>DPI seems like such an American unit of measure. Do Europeans and
>other more advanced cultures use a more metricized term?
I have no idea, but I'll try to find out.
>Also, I'd think it'd be nice to specify the intended physical
>dimensions of the image rather than directly specifying the DPI.
>Or specify the physical dimensions and the DPI but not the pixels.
Actually, I think that would be nice, but I don't know if the standard
graphics programs and publishing programs would recognize the physical
size statement. There *is* some sort of standard established for DPI.
I don't know the details of it yet, but I would want anything in the
way of DPI or physical size headers to be compatible with current
industry standards.
In other words, if I purposely rendered a file with the intention of
printing it at 300dpi and it was to be 8"x10" in physical size, I
would want Photoshop or some publishing software to recognize this
automatically. I know this can be done, but I don't know the details
of how yet. I will start looking for the established methods. I *do*
know that printers (humans) often only go by DPI. If you set a
recommended DPI in your file, the graphics software will automatically
calculate the physical size based on that and the height and width of
the image measured in pixels. People doing professional publishing
don't even usually look at the exact size of an image in pixels. In
fact, Photoshop measures images in physical units, which are based on
the image's stored DPI figure. If you want Photoshop to measure images
in pixels, you have to override this feature and turn on the option of
measuring in pixels.
*******************
Lastly, I want to mention that my original proposal was for three
different headers, and not something to be rolled into one custom
comment file. I hope everyone understands that now. I know at least
one person got that confused. For the record, I was thinking of 3
different headers:
1) User supplied, intended for author name and copyright notice. It's
final use is ultimately up to the user, and can be omitted if desired.
The length of this text should be kept small.
2) POV-Ray name and version number header, inserted automatically.
3) "DPI header" - or something that functions like that. Based either
upon an ini file setting or via a keyword in the POV file.
Sorry for the verbosity of this post, but I felt that some people
hadn't totally understood my intentions.
Thanks,
Glen Berry
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:10:04 GMT, Glen Berry wrote:
>>Also, I'd think it'd be nice to specify the intended physical
>>dimensions of the image rather than directly specifying the DPI.
>>Or specify the physical dimensions and the DPI but not the pixels.
>
>Actually, I think that would be nice, but I don't know if the standard
>graphics programs and publishing programs would recognize the physical
>size statement.
They don't have to. Given any two of the three parameters, POV could
calculate the third. If I say I want an 8"x10" at 300 DPI, POV could
easily figure out that I meant +W2400 +H3000. Contrariwise, if I say
this 2400x3000 image should be 8"x10", POV would figure out the 300 DPI
part for itself. In either case it would write a DPI=300 header into
a 2400x3000 image. The only problem would come when someone indirectly
specifies a DPI that the service bureau can't handle directly, like 216
or something. That's a wetware issue, though.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30 Jun 1999 17:41:44 -0400, par### [at] fwicom (Ron Parker) wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:10:04 GMT, Glen Berry wrote:
>>>Also, I'd think it'd be nice to specify the intended physical
>>>dimensions of the image rather than directly specifying the DPI.
>>>Or specify the physical dimensions and the DPI but not the pixels.
>>
>>Actually, I think that would be nice, but I don't know if the standard
>>graphics programs and publishing programs would recognize the physical
>>size statement.
>
>They don't have to. Given any two of the three parameters, POV could
>calculate the third. If I say I want an 8"x10" at 300 DPI, POV could
>easily figure out that I meant +W2400 +H3000. Contrariwise, if I say
>this 2400x3000 image should be 8"x10", POV would figure out the 300 DPI
>part for itself. In either case it would write a DPI=300 header into
>a 2400x3000 image. The only problem would come when someone indirectly
>specifies a DPI that the service bureau can't handle directly, like 216
>or something. That's a wetware issue, though.
Okay, I think I might have misunderstood you the first time. You
weren't exactly intending to place a "physical size" statement in a
special header were you? I guess you had meant to be able to tell POV
what physical size and DPI you wanted to cater to, and let POV pick
the size in pixels, or something like that. That could be a handy way
to do things. Personally, I've always wanted a way to specify the
image size from within the pov scene file, if I wanted to. Maybe that
could be done at the same time we resolve the "DPI issue"?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glen Berry wrote:
>
> >DPI seems like such an American unit of measure. Do Europeans and
> >other more advanced cultures use a more metricized term?
>
> I have no idea, but I'll try to find out.
>
Strangely enough DPI seems standard over here (Europe - NL) too.
There's imperialism for you!
;)
Remco
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
