Hi Andy,
No, i am using same PV installation in both case under same server.
As you suggested, i saved the state in Python format and run under GUI
(Tools > Python Shell > Run Script). It basically opens a new RenderView
and places the color bars like in co-processing output (misplaced,
thinner and smaller) and does not show anything about the rest of the
visualization. It just have color bars but i could see the correct
pipeline in the pipeline browser. It is little bit weird. If i am doing
something wrong, please let me know.
Also, i did not modify the default config settings of the GUI and if you
want me to check any specific option, please let me know.
Thank for your help,
Regards,
--ufuk
On 02/01/2017 18:50, Andy Bauer wrote:
Hi Ufuk,
I'm not sure what is causing the difference. I'm guessing not all of
the information for the view is saved in the state. Any chance that
you're using different versions of ParaView for the GUI and Catalyst
generated images? I see that the Python script is specifying that it
was generated in a PV 5.2 release candidate.
If it's the same version of PV then you can test the state mechanism
in PV by saving the state as both a Python script as well as a pvsm
file. After that, try generating the image by loading the pvsm state
file and running the Python state file in the GUI.
Another possibility is that there are some config settings in the GUI
that aren't used in Catalyst. If you don't mind helping narrow down
the cause of the issue we can put in a bug report for this.
Thanks,
Andy
On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Ufuk Utku Turuncoglu (BE)
<u.utku.turunco...@be.itu.edu.tr
<mailto:u.utku.turunco...@be.itu.edu.tr>> wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to use Paraview co-processing component to create
visualization from custom model. The problem is that the color
bars are
misplaced and also smaller and thinner in the co-processing output
(saved
png file) if i compare it with direct visualization from Paraview.
I am
attaching sample png files for both case and also Python file that
is used
for the co-processing. I just wonder that is it possible to fix it
easily?
It might be a bug but i am not sure.
Thanks,
Regards,
--ufuk
_______________________________________________
Powered by www.kitware.com <http://www.kitware.com>
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
<http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html>
Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView <http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView>
Search the list archives at:
http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
<http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView>
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
<http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview>
_______________________________________________
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
