"Dean S. Messing" on  wrote...
| 
| 
| 
| Anthony, I've spent the better part of a day and night tracing
| a bug in a rather complicated script that does too much image processing
| to describe. I (finally) found the problem. 
| 
| Im-3.2.5 give _very_ different results for
| 
| convert -depth 8 -sharpen '0.0x0.5' in.png out.png
| 
| than the exact same command in Im-3.3.4
| 
| Recall I switched to the latter because Cristy was kind enough to fix
| the behaviour of display when stretching the display window and when
| using the magnifier.
| 
| Im-3.3.4 gives a much sharper result then 3.2.5 (and hence breaks
| some things badly).  Furthermore, with Im-3.2.5 the
| differences between 0.0x0.2, 0.0x0.5, 0.0x1.0 are quite obvious.
| 
| With Im-3.3.4 there is nearly no difference.  So it starts out much
| sharper and the adjustability is much poorer if one wants to enhance
| by only a very small amount.
| 
| Do you know what's going on?
| Were there changes from 3.2.5 to 3.3.4 that would have done this?
| 
| I am "regressing" back to 3.2.5 to regenerate some results for a
| report that I must send tomorrow.  It's 3am now!
| 
| Dean


I am not sure.

The ChangeLog only reports...

2006-05-01  6.2.7-3 Cristy  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  * Add -adaptive-sharpen to the convert and mogrify programs.

This probably should not have effected sharpen.   Prehaps you better
try putting up some examples.

Especially into the IM Forum bugs area.


Though I am sorry I have not been reading the forum as much and normal
of late as I am very bust with work commitments right now.



  Anthony Thyssen ( System Programmer )    <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Old kiters never die...   They just fly away!
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Anthony's Home is his Castle     http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/
_______________________________________________
Magick-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://studio.imagemagick.org/mailman/listinfo/magick-users

Reply via email to