Warning do NOT use -clone outsize parenthesis. While it works it is
not meant to be used in that way. If you later add parenthesis around
the expression, things may start to do wrong.
Also it is better to 'double' the number of images with \( -clone 0--1 \)
which said clone the images from the first '0' to the last '-1'
than to use individual clones.
However you can also use...
\( -clone 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0 \)
By using it in -format the '%' expandsion gets delayed until the info:
image writing takes place. This is handled differently to using the
expression in a -set, -distort, or -annotate which performs the action
on individual images (so -scene is not applied and 'n' is '1' (only one
image is being processed in a loop!)
I however do regard that 'n' being set to 1 during this processing
to be a bug, but one that may not be fixed until the IM v7
re-development.
As for -annotate 't' being set to one hundred. I think that may be a bug.
The Definition of fx:t is that is should be the image index of the image
that 's' (the current image) points to. 'u' remember is always the
first (zeroth) image.
I do not think a 'scene' number, which has a completely different usage
(output value) should effect 'fx:t' ( and definatally not effect 'n').
As such I would regard fx:t as being scene effected - a bug.
The 'scene' number is actually image meta data (from image reading),
and probably should remain a completely separate entity to image index.
In a similar way %p (no fx) should also be the image index, while %s
should be the final scene number.
The -scene operator basically has the effect of re-numbering the image
meta-data scene numbers, which is attached to the individual images just
like -label -caption and -comment meta-data tags.
Anthony Thyssen ( System Programmer ) <[email protected]>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot,
but don't let that fool you. He is an idiot." -- Groucho Marx
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony's Home is his Castle http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:40:21 -0400
"Christian Rauch" <[email protected]> wrote:
| I know this is ridiculous:
|
| Ok, I tried this:
| C:\IM\ImageMagick>convert myImage.jpg (replace with yours) -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0-clone 0
| -clone 0" -scene 100 -resize 320x240 +repage -format "index: %[fx:t],n:
| %[fx:n], scale: %[fx:2^((t-100)/n)]" info:
|
| And the info looks ok for the function:
| index: 100,n: 73, scale: 1
| index: 101,n: 73, scale: 1.00954
| index: 102,n: 73, scale: 1.01917
| index: 103,n: 73, scale: 1.0289
| index: 104,n: 73, scale: 1.03871
| index: 105,n: 73, scale: 1.04862
| index: 106,n: 73, scale: 1.05863
| index: 107,n: 73, scale: 1.06872.......
|
| But if I do this:
| convert myImage.jpg -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0
| -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0 -clone 0-clone 0
| -distort SRT "%[fx:2^((t-100)/n)] 0" -scene 100 -resize 320x240 +repage
| zoomtest%04d.jpg
|
| It does not work,it produces the correct file running file names, but it
| does not seem to calculate an increasing scale value, images produced are
| all the same scale. I also tried replacing the n variable inside the
| function with a hardcoded variable with the same result.
|
|
| Christian Rauch
| [email protected]
| www.dealerspecialties.com
|
|
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Anthony Thyssen [mailto:[email protected]]
| Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 7:13 PM
| To: Christian Rauch; IM Users List
| Subject: Re: [magick-users] creating Zoom sequence with IM
|
| On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:37:49 -0400
| "Christian Rauch" <[email protected]> wrote:
|
| | This all worked great, thanks for your help. One more little issue,
| | when trying to generate a image sequence with %d and trying to force
| | the scene numbers with -scene 100 , the t variable used to compute
| | the scale factor does not work correctly, any ideas on how to force
| | the numbering and still being able to compute using t?
| |
| The -scene setting does not seem to effect the fx: 't' variable.
| Remember 't' is the 'index' and as such started at '0'.
|
| One way of finding out what the value of the fx expression is to use
|
| convert rose: \( +clone \) \( -clone 0--1 \) \
| -scene 100 -set label '%[fx:t]' -format %l info:
| 0
| 1
| 2
| 3
|
| Note that the number of images variable 'n' does not work at this time.
| At least not outside the full "-fx" operator.
|
|
| Anthony Thyssen ( System Programmer ) <[email protected]>
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Ralph's Observation:
| It is a mistake to allow any mechanical object to
| realize that you are in a hurry.
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 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
