New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

convert -density 127 -delay 200 foo.pdf foo.gif #5

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 26, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@mvkorpel
Contributor

mvkorpel commented Sep 26, 2018

I created sharper versions of the example GIFs. The recipe I used is shown in the title, and the software was:

Version: ImageMagick 7.0.7-28 Q16 x64 2018-03-25 http://www.imagemagick.org

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@eddelbuettel

eddelbuettel Sep 26, 2018

Owner

Hm. I would love for these to be crisper, but looking at them side by side both here (ie browser looking at file in your fork and my repo) and after cloning yours makes them ... more identical than different.

Maybe -density 127 is already the default?

Owner

eddelbuettel commented Sep 26, 2018

Hm. I would love for these to be crisper, but looking at them side by side both here (ie browser looking at file in your fork and my repo) and after cloning yours makes them ... more identical than different.

Maybe -density 127 is already the default?

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@eddelbuettel

eddelbuettel Sep 26, 2018

Owner

Also, density according to the manual page does take different arguments:

         -density geometry    horizontal and vertical density of the image

which is in fact what I used it for: --density 640x480.

Owner

eddelbuettel commented Sep 26, 2018

Also, density according to the manual page does take different arguments:

         -density geometry    horizontal and vertical density of the image

which is in fact what I used it for: --density 640x480.

@mvkorpel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mvkorpel

mvkorpel Sep 26, 2018

Contributor

Here is how I see the difference (in "presento"). The image should be examined in full size. The top row is "before" and the bottom is "after". I downloaded the image files from my fork and combined (twice) with +append and -append in convert. Did you look at the right branch?
presento_before_after

Contributor

mvkorpel commented Sep 26, 2018

Here is how I see the difference (in "presento"). The image should be examined in full size. The top row is "before" and the bottom is "after". I downloaded the image files from my fork and combined (twice) with +append and -append in convert. Did you look at the right branch?
presento_before_after

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@eddelbuettel

eddelbuettel Sep 26, 2018

Owner

That's it. I looked at your master! Silly me. Have Metropolis open and it is night and day.

That makes me really happy. Thanks a big bunch for this.

Now, given that I quoted the (not helpful!!) manual page, how did you learn abou this? Long-time (naive) user of imagemagick here too but I was unaware...

Owner

eddelbuettel commented Sep 26, 2018

That's it. I looked at your master! Silly me. Have Metropolis open and it is night and day.

That makes me really happy. Thanks a big bunch for this.

Now, given that I quoted the (not helpful!!) manual page, how did you learn abou this? Long-time (naive) user of imagemagick here too but I was unaware...

@eddelbuettel eddelbuettel merged commit 5e0337b into eddelbuettel:master Sep 26, 2018

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@mvkorpel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mvkorpel

mvkorpel Sep 26, 2018

Contributor

I googled imagemagick rescale text sharp and found a usage example at http://imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?t=27473

The documentation for the -density option (when following a link from the convert manual) specifies that geometry can be one-dimensional or two-dimensional.

I tried a few different densities and used the results (even one trial would have been enough) to calculate that 127 is the density required for 640x480 raster output, the same size as in the original GIFs. I used a crude stopwatch method (not image metadata) and estimated that the delay between frames in the original images was pretty close to two seconds.

Contributor

mvkorpel commented Sep 26, 2018

I googled imagemagick rescale text sharp and found a usage example at http://imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?t=27473

The documentation for the -density option (when following a link from the convert manual) specifies that geometry can be one-dimensional or two-dimensional.

I tried a few different densities and used the results (even one trial would have been enough) to calculate that 127 is the density required for 640x480 raster output, the same size as in the original GIFs. I used a crude stopwatch method (not image metadata) and estimated that the delay between frames in the original images was pretty close to two seconds.

@mvkorpel mvkorpel deleted the mvkorpel:crisp_gifs branch Sep 26, 2018

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@eddelbuettel

eddelbuettel Sep 26, 2018

Owner

Excellent. I added docs/Makefile to not forget this, and credited you in ChangeLog and NEWS.

Owner

eddelbuettel commented Sep 26, 2018

Excellent. I added docs/Makefile to not forget this, and credited you in ChangeLog and NEWS.

@mvkorpel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mvkorpel

mvkorpel Sep 27, 2018

Contributor

You might also want to edit README.md and remove the comments about losing font crispness.

Contributor

mvkorpel commented Sep 27, 2018

You might also want to edit README.md and remove the comments about losing font crispness.

@eddelbuettel

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@eddelbuettel

eddelbuettel Sep 27, 2018

Owner

Yes, absolutely, that was already in the pipeline and will go out with release 0.0.2.

Owner

eddelbuettel commented Sep 27, 2018

Yes, absolutely, that was already in the pipeline and will go out with release 0.0.2.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment