Skip to content
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

Understand the Wand / imagemagick modifiers better #4

Open
etcadinfinitum opened this issue Dec 13, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Understand the Wand / imagemagick modifiers better #4

etcadinfinitum opened this issue Dec 13, 2018 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested

Comments

@etcadinfinitum
Copy link
Owner

It would be ideal to create tiled demos of various combinations of operators and parameters to see the effects of each operation and find good default parameter sets.

etcadinfinitum added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 13, 2018
@etcadinfinitum
Copy link
Owner Author

Testing img.modulate(x, y)

Original Image

bce223b38aeed99d

Image grid (excerpt due to 19MB file):

modulate_call_x-1000to1000_y100to500

Interesting individual results

Image img.modulate() call Interesting behavior
-800x200 img.modulate(-800, 200) Tons of JPG artifact production, interesting color polarity
-1000x-1000 img.modulate(-1000, -1000) Dark scheme, lots of artifacts
-100x-200 img.modulate(-100, -200) Focusing on red hues, all others appear to be blacked out
-200x0 img.modulate(-200, 0) Some artifacts, colors are inverted

etcadinfinitum added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 16, 2018
Related to #4 - trying to pinpoint interesting default parameters for keyword invocations
etcadinfinitum added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 16, 2018
Related to #4
Export each frame to a .jpg file to be reassembled has resolved issues of all frames being fully transparent; however, some gifs only contain color diffs for subsequent frames instead of complete frames. Further work is needed to determine if cumulative jpg assembly/exports can be accomplished when saving each modulated frame to a .jpg file.
Also worked on helpful user messages for the bot; checked for file size of resulting file before attempting to send to avoid rejection by Discord for files over 8MB. (Also did other small maintenance things.)
@etcadinfinitum
Copy link
Owner Author

Testing img.function('sinusoid', [frequency, phase_shift, amplitude, bias])

Using same original image as above.

Based on some cursory scripting results, the amplitude argument will mute colors on a reversed scale of 0-1 (so 0.2 is a bad choice, but 0.8 is not), but doesn't have much effect at the higher end of the scale. The bias argument will lighten the image on a scale of 0-1.

Looking at frequency and phase shift only

Result set Parameters
result_1-5 Vertical (top to bottom): Frequency (1-5)

Horizontal (left to right): Phase Shift (-30 to -90 in 15-degree increments)
result_6-10 Vertical (top to bottom): Frequency (6-10)

Horizontal (left to right): Phase Shift (-30 to -90 in 15-degree increments)

etcadinfinitum added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 29, 2018
Related to issue #4 - trying to find better modifiers for the function() call on images. Currently, the parameters for img.function('sinusoid') are being randomly generated, and it is a good idea to restrict the range of parameter generation so that results are more consistent and do not come out too dark or with a gray filter.
etcadinfinitum added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 1, 2019
@etcadinfinitum etcadinfinitum added enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested labels Feb 5, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant