digikam 1.3.0
in [Slackware]
|
From: John F. Morse on 10 Jun 2010 11:47 Cousin Stanley wrote: >> .... >> One other neat image utility for batch processing >> and more is ImageMagick. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageMagick >> >> If you don't appreciate the command line interface (terminal), >> then avoid ImageMagick! There is no pointy-clicky. >> > > first .... > > display /path/to/some/image.ext > > then .... > > left-click on the displayed image > > A pointy-clickty menu is presented > that includes a fairly nice set > of available ImageMagick operations > that can be applied to the image .... > Hmmmm.... Didn't know about that, so I tried it. Wikipedia even claims: "The software mainly consists of a number of command-line interface utilities for manipulating images. ImageMagick does not have a GUI based interface to edit images, as do Adobe Photoshop and GIMP, but instead modifies existing images as directed by various command-line parameters." Careful reading and understanding the term "interface to edit images" is truthful though. Have you tried it? At first it took me ten minutes to finally open an image file that was on my desktop! Not the greatest, user-friendly file management "drill" that I've ever seen. :-( It opens in the ~/ directory, but you cannot select then click "Open" on a sub-directory, nor simply double-click to open a sub-directory. You must type the remainder of the path, meaning you must know the filename(s). It is faster to simply use "display {path/file}" with ~/ already assumed. That way you have the power of the "history" command available, as well as "ls" and other useful BASH commands. The operations menu is handy though. Allows you to find or try various operations without knowing the program really well, or reading the manual page for hours. ;-) I especially liked the 3x3 (nine image) window for previewing [Miscellany --> Show Preview... --> {some enhancement, effect, or F/X}] which gives you a quick look at what various values will do to an image. I don't remember ever using ImageMagick's "display" program. My use has always involved the "convert" program, which has so many choices available you'd likely never use them all. It is great for batch processing a directory of larger images to create thumbnails for Web page links. There are other neat things available, like applying watermarks to a whole directory. I remember several years ago spending a few days playing with ImageMagick. Now I'll need to try out this new feature: "Recently support for seam carving (content-aware image resizing) ("liquid rescaling" of images) has been added. This feature allows, for example, rescaling 4:3 images into 16:9 images without distorting the image." Thanks for the tip, Cuz. ;-) -- John When a person has -- whether they knew it or not -- already rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?
From: Loki Harfagr on 10 Jun 2010 12:46 Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:47:30 -0500, John F. Morse did cat : > Cousin Stanley wrote: >>> .... >>> One other neat image utility for batch processing and more is >>> ImageMagick. >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageMagick >>> >>> If you don't appreciate the command line interface (terminal), then >>> avoid ImageMagick! There is no pointy-clicky. >>> >>> >> first .... >> >> display /path/to/some/image.ext >> >> then .... >> >> left-click on the displayed image >> >> A pointy-clickty menu is presented >> that includes a fairly nice set >> of available ImageMagick operations >> that can be applied to the image .... >> >> > > Hmmmm.... Didn't know about that, so I tried it. > > Wikipedia even claims: > > "The software mainly consists of a number of command-line interface > utilities for manipulating images. ImageMagick does not have a GUI based > interface to edit images, as do Adobe Photoshop and GIMP, but instead > modifies existing images as directed by various command-line > parameters." > > Careful reading and understanding the term "interface to edit images" is > truthful though. > > Have you tried it? > > At first it took me ten minutes to finally open an image file that was > on my desktop! Not the greatest, user-friendly file management "drill" > that I've ever seen. :-( how come? Either on CLI use the 'display ~/Desktop/mypic.picext or if in a GUI use your GUI built-in selector, usually some stuff like right-click/openwith, what was the trouble? > > It opens in the ~/ directory, but you cannot select then click "Open" on > a sub-directory, nor simply double-click to open a sub-directory. You > must type the remainder of the path, meaning you must know the > filename(s). Just a tiny tip on this peculiar point, you can globalize the selection set, for instance: $ display *.jp[eg] *.png or even on heavy horses: $ display * */* though, mind that in case there's a movie in the tree you'll then flick one pic per frame, can take time ,-) so better use more prescise selectors, e: $ find . -type f -name '*.jp[eg]' |xargs display and, to navigate, use either right-clich/next/former or use the keys (space/backspace) ....(I snip the rest as I've got nothing (even sensible) to add to it)
From: John F. Morse on 10 Jun 2010 13:31 Loki Harfagr wrote: > Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:47:30 -0500, John F. Morse did cat : > >> Cousin Stanley wrote: >> >>>> .... >>>> One other neat image utility for batch processing and more is >>>> ImageMagick. >>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImageMagick >>>> >>>> If you don't appreciate the command line interface (terminal), then >>>> avoid ImageMagick! There is no pointy-clicky. >>>> >>> first .... >>> >>> display /path/to/some/image.ext >>> >>> then .... >>> >>> left-click on the displayed image >>> >>> A pointy-clickty menu is presented >>> that includes a fairly nice set >>> of available ImageMagick operations >>> that can be applied to the image .... >>> >>> >>> >> Hmmmm.... Didn't know about that, so I tried it. >> >> Wikipedia even claims: >> >> "The software mainly consists of a number of command-line interface >> utilities for manipulating images. ImageMagick does not have a GUI based >> interface to edit images, as do Adobe Photoshop and GIMP, but instead >> modifies existing images as directed by various command-line >> parameters." >> >> Careful reading and understanding the term "interface to edit images" is >> truthful though. >> >> Have you tried it? >> >> At first it took me ten minutes to finally open an image file that was >> on my desktop! Not the greatest, user-friendly file management "drill" >> that I've ever seen. :-( >> > > how come? Either on CLI use the 'display ~/Desktop/mypic.picext > or if in a GUI use your GUI built-in selector, usually some stuff > like right-click/openwith, what was the trouble? > You are assuming I had trouble with standard BASH commands. Not so. I was explaining the ImageMagick interface. It would not allow me to navigate downward ("drill") into deeper directories. >> It opens in the ~/ directory, but you cannot select then click "Open" on >> a sub-directory, nor simply double-click to open a sub-directory. You >> must type the remainder of the path, meaning you must know the >> filename(s). >> > > Just a tiny tip on this peculiar point, you can globalize the selection set, > for instance: > $ display *.jp[eg] *.png > or even on heavy horses: > $ display * */* > Again, you are using a terminal. Try using the ImageMagick "file manager" that I was describing, and which Cousin Stanley originally mentioned. > though, mind that in case there's a movie in the tree you'll then > flick one pic per frame, can take time ,-) so better use more prescise selectors, e: > $ find . -type f -name '*.jp[eg]' |xargs display > > and, to navigate, use either right-clich/next/former or use the keys (space/backspace) > ...(I snip the rest as I've got nothing (even sensible) to add to it) > Again, please get on the correct page so you can see what I was seeing, enter in a terminal: display (You might understand this better if I use your method "$ display" but your method assumes a particular shell is used, and the $ prompt could be misinterpreted by some as a character they need to enter.) Without any options will get you the "Browse and Select a File" window. I don't have any problem using the CLI (BASH), Loki. It is the ImageMagick file manager (browser) that didn't allow drilling deeper into the directory structure with mouse clicking. I had to manually type the longer path and file information to get into lower directories. -- John When a person has -- whether they knew it or not -- already rejected the Truth, by what means do they discern a lie?
From: Henrik Carlqvist on 10 Jun 2010 14:36 "John F. Morse" <john(a)example.invalid> wrote: >>>>> One other neat image utility for batch processing and more is >>>>> ImageMagick. Yes, ImageMagick is great for batch processing, for that purpose the cli program convert is usually used. >>> It opens in the ~/ directory, but you cannot select then click "Open" >>> on a sub-directory, nor simply double-click to open a sub-directory. Doubleclick on sub directories in the ImageMagick display utility works for me. It then opens that directory and shows its files and next level sub directories. To get back to the previos level there is a button "Up" and there is also a button "Home" which I don't really understand. Mostly it takes you to ~ as expected, but at some occasions it seems to take me to some other default directory. > It is the ImageMagick file manager (browser) that didn't allow drilling > deeper into the directory structure with mouse clicking. I had to > manually type the longer path and file information to get into lower > directories. Why do you want to use the display utility to process images? If you want to use point and click I would prefer some program which from the beginning was meant to be point and click. Gimp is great for such a purpose and xv might also be useful. ImageMagick is great for command line batch processing of images. If you think that it hurts to put your foot behind your neck you shouldn't put your foot behind your neck. If you think that ImageMagick is bad for your use you should find another tool for your use or edit the configuration files for ImageMagick to make it better fit your use. In the Linux world all those files ending with .c are configuration files giving you control without limits. regards Henrik -- The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is: hc3(at)poolhem.se Examples of addresses which go to spammers: root(a)localhost postmaster(a)localhost
From: Henrik Carlqvist on 10 Jun 2010 14:49
notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: > Most cameras require no such protocol for linux to simply mount the > camera's storage media just like a USB card reader. Yes, and simply mounting it as a disk might be really convenient some times. However, is the disk interface really the "right" way to access a camera? Most of the times you want to do 3 things with your camera: 1) You want to copy pictures from the camera to your hard disk 2) You want to list which pictures are stored on your camera 3) You want to delete pictures on the camera. These common tasks can be done with both a disc interface and with the PTP protocol. The disc interface gives you a few more features: 1) You are able to partition the storage media into different partitions 2) You are able to format the storage media with a different file system like reiserfs 3) You are able to fsck a file system which you messed up because you forgot to umount the camera before disconnecting it. The PTP interface also gives you a few extra features: 1) Your computer is able to control your camera to capture an image 2) Your computer is able to control your camera to capture a movie 3) Your computer is able to control your camera to capture sound In my opinion one group of features above might be really useful for a camera. The other group of features are useful for real disks and usb keys, but might make a camera useless. regards Henrik -- The address in the header is only to prevent spam. My real address is: hc3(at)poolhem.se Examples of addresses which go to spammers: root(a)localhost postmaster(a)localhost |