Signature and Frames...

[Emanuele]

Hi all....

just wondering, and this might be silly to some, if there could be a way of developing a signature and framing process icon?
I find myself still using Photoshop to put a frame or at least a signature on the image. Mostly for copyright reasons, even if my images are not that great.

I know about the sample script that is already included, but it would be great to have something fancier...

yes? no?

Thanks for listening,
E.

[Carlos Milovic]

It is on the development plans, but with very low priority right now.

[Niall Saunders]

Hi Emanuele,

In fact, what you are looking for is actually both simple and complicated, at the SAME time.

First, you need to specify WHAT is going to be used as a 'border', or 'frame', for your image. Of course, the list of possibilities is endless, infinite - so how do you propose a script or process that can handle that?

So, let's say that you simply want an 8-pixel wide border filled with a solid 'colour' of 50% 'gray'. Now, that becomes easy, because we just need a 'new image' that is 16 pixels taller and wider than the 'source' you are working with, and we just need to fill it with Rd=0.5, Gn=0.5 and Bu=0.5 - all quite trivially easy to do (so easy, in fact, that you really do NOT need a script, or process, to be able to achieve this).

Then, once you have your 'grey' image, you just use PixelMath to superimpose your 'source' onto the border (I won't trouble you with the actual expression just now - suffice to say that it is NOT complicated)

Finally, you want to add your 'signature' - by this, do you mean some rows of text (in which case the 'Signature' PJSR script might be all that you need), or do you mean a true Van Gogh 'squiggle' at the bottom right corner?

If you really need a 'squiggle', then it would again jsut be a case of 'scanning in' your authentic 'squiggle' and using PI to process this into a neat and tidy representation of your signature - and then, again, just using PixelMath to 'superimpose' this onto the image at the appropriate location.

At NO TIME would you have to work outside PixInsight - other than to get your signature 'scanned'.

And, knowledge of HOW TO DO THIS is actually very valuable PI knowledge in its own right - even more so if you actually solve the various stages yourself - learning just how powerful PixMath actually is.

Have a think - and if you struggle, I am sure that each step can be broken down into a demonstration, to encourage you to look at solving the next step yourself.

Who knows, you may even then write the final PJSR for your own use!!

Cheers,

[Nocturnal]

Hi,

this is one of those features that I think PI should NOT add. PI can't hope to compete with even free applications like GIMP, Paint.NET and cheap ones like Paint Shop Pro etc. There is no need for PI to draw text and graphics in 32b float format. In fact if it were to add this feature the image would almost certainly be at the 'end of the road', no longer suitable for further processing because of the nature of the graphics that were added.

Simply export your final image in some low bid depth quality (I use 16b TIFF although 8b TIFF or uncompressed PNG works too), import into your paint program, add text and publish.

Frankly with everything that's on the roadmap for PI I really hope this does not gain traction. There is no need for it.

[Niall Saunders]

There is no need for it

That is, personally, my feeling as well.

However, knowledge of 'how' it could be achieved - in PI alone - actually helps teach some more of the many tricks that PI keeps up its digital sleeves.

In fact, I really do NOT like to see 'framed and signed' images on the 'Net - it totally detracts from the image itself, and usually results in an automatic 'click to close' or 'click to go back' response from me.

I like to be able to take an image (a 'good' image, that is) and get it full-screen, or full-screen on a totally black background - and then simply enjoy it, and it alone (often in a darkened room - I am weird and sad that way ).

Borders and signatures just spoil that ability - so I simply 'move on'.

Cheers,

[Enzo De Bernardini]

We can create the frame and signature outside of PI, saving the image in transparent TIFF format (Photoshop can do this, save as TIFF, without layers, with transparency). PI recognize the transparent pixels. Then, you can sum image and frame in PixelMath. Of course, both images must be the same size.

The only detail I could not resolve are the black pixels on frame, in the sum them have value 0 and not shown... Do you know any way to do it?

With this resolved, if ever use the same frame, you just have to create it only once (or change some detail for each image, as the object name) and all remains in family, as I personally like  

I agree with Sander. And with a small procedure we can continue working always inside PI  8)

Attached: a small screenshot and a transparent TIFF, if you want to make their own tests to resolve the black-pixels detail.

Best regards,

Enzo.

[Juan Conejero]

Hi Sander,

PI can't hope to compete with even free applications like GIMP, Paint.NET and cheap ones like Paint Shop Pro etc.

Here I have to disagree. Right now PI offers the necessary building blocks (in both PCL and PJSR) to create painting and drawing tools at least as good and powerful as those offered by the applications you've mentioned. It's just a matter of putting the right pieces together.

There is no need for PI to draw text and graphics in 32b float format.

That's true. In fact, most graphics functions work in 8 bits per channel (32-bit AARRGGBB pixel format), especially the text drawing and bitmap compositing functions.

Frankly with everything that's on the roadmap for PI I really hope this does not gain traction. There is no need for it

If we want PixInsight to be a long-lived project, it is essential to build a complete framework without too 'gaps'. Drawing and painting tools, at least at a reasonable level to compete with the applications you've mentioned and other well-known ones, are one of these gaps in my opinion. Each time a user has to move to another application PI as a whole is hurt.

[Nocturnal]

I think PI 'hurts' when it tries to emulate functionality that's already available for free (or cheaply) when that time could be spent on differentiating features. Of course it's up to you to decide which way to go but this is my feedback on this topic. Staying within PI for everything should not be a goal. To provide the best possible tools that can't be had anywhere else should be the goal. I really don't mind exporting my image to PSP to add a text label. In fact I think it's a clean break that separates actual astro photo processing from gratuitous bells and whistles. Adding graphics is always the final step so it's not like the process gets interrupted by doing the final few steps in PSP (or whatever). If this was an intermediate step I'd have to agree that hopping out of PI is 'hurtful'. As it stands the severity of the situation is being exaggerated.

As for competing with GIMP/Paint.NET/PSP well you either have no respect for what other people have done in years of work or you're a little too sure of yourself right now You know I have tremendous respect for your abilities but as a selfish user I want your abilities aimed at astro photography centric tasks. Not things I already have and everyone else can get for free.

[Emanuele]

Uh oh! 
I have opened a can of worms! How do I get them back inside?

[Nocturnal]

A can of worms perhaps but sometimes these have to be cracked open to get the discussion started

[Emanuele]

Ahhh well, true Sander.

Anyway, yes, I agree that its really trivial what I was asking. In fact there are plenty of more things with much higher priority! Layers for example....

Ok, ok, I'm just kidding. 

[Juan Conejero]

Sander and Emanuele,

I appreciate your always invaluable feedback, and this is a great and enriching discussion. There are absolutely no taboos here so please feel free to open as many cans of worms as you need to.

I think PI 'hurts' when it tries to emulate functionality that's already available for free (or cheaply)

Following that statement, PI wouldn't even exist. You can gather a small set of free/cheap applications that do most of what PI does, and certainly some of them do important things quite well. The fact that an application is free or cheap means absolutely nothing to me. There are well-known, ubiquitous imaging applications that are expensive, there are open-source applications, and there are cheap applications. That doesn't matter; only performance, design, innovation and implementation quality (not necessarily in that order) are important. At the precise instant that I feel I am justifying my work in the fact that PI's price is less than other software's price, I'll abandon this project. I hate boring things, and working just to make things cheap or free is extremely boring for me.

On the other hand, I never try to emulate anything. PixInsight is different because it offers a different perspective, new paradigms and methodologies, hopefully better, more efficient and much funnier ways.

As for competing with GIMP/Paint.NET/PSP well you either have no respect for what other people have done in years of work or you're a little too sure of yourself right now

Few people has had some respect for what I've been doing in years of work, so why should it be different in the other direction?

I believe that when one works really hard, honestly and putting all the meat on the barbecue, one can go very very far, usually much farther than expected. For example, when someone asks for layers in PI, I could say 'but layers are already available in the XXX application'. But that isn't the correct answer, not if we're talking about PI.

In general, competing with open-source applications is very difficult. I am conscious of that. You know, some day, tomorrow perhaps, a team of young and brilliant open-source developers may come out with a nice software package and PI may lose its current 'traction' --which is the result of years of effort-- in just a couple days. That's how the game is and I know the rules well, it is hard but heck, it has been my choice

Enough rambling and divagation for tonight. Drawing tools are close to the tail in the list of priorities, I am not so mad