Am Dienstag, dem 02.04.2024 um 13:35 +1030 schrieb Christian Gelinek:
> Thank you all for your responses.
>
> On 2/4/24 12:41, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 10:06:40PM -0400, e...@gmx.us wrote:
> >
> > The command-line equivalent is "dpkg -L", to list the files that belong
>
Thank you all for your responses.
On 2/4/24 12:41, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 10:06:40PM -0400, e...@gmx.us wrote:
>
> The command-line equivalent is "dpkg -L", to list the files that belong
> to an installed package.
I should note that down somewhere... I'm sure I've come ac
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 12:07:47 +1030
Christian Gelinek wrote:
> I have ImageMagick installed, but only the `convert` binary is in my
> path.
>
> Other binaries like `magick` are not. Where can I find them, why
> aren't they installed?
man imagemagick
--
Does anybody read
On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 10:06:40PM -0400, e...@gmx.us wrote:
> On 4/1/24 21:37, Christian Gelinek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have ImageMagick installed, but only the `convert` binary is in my path.
> >
> > Other binaries like `magick` are not. Where can I find t
On 4/1/24 21:37, Christian Gelinek wrote:
Hi,
I have ImageMagick installed, but only the `convert` binary is in my path.
Other binaries like `magick` are not. Where can I find them,
In Synaptic, if you get the properties of an installed package one of the
tabs is "installed files"
Hi,
I have ImageMagick installed, but only the `convert` binary is in my path.
Other binaries like `magick` are not. Where can I find them, why aren't
they installed?
Thanks,
Christian
debian-u...@howorth.org.uk writes:
>> I don't understand, there is no ImageMagick ML/group
>> registered on Gmane, and just some <10 people on
>> #imagemagick on Libera?
>>
>> People don't care about this software which is the CLI
>>
Emanuel Berg wrote:
> I don't understand, there is no ImageMagick ML/group
> registered on Gmane, and just some <10 people on #imagemagick
> on Libera?
>
> People don't care about this software which is the CLI
> powerhouse for image editing?
I occasio
I don't understand, there is no ImageMagick ML/group
registered on Gmane, and just some <10 people on #imagemagick
on Libera?
People don't care about this software which is the CLI
powerhouse for image editing?
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
I just wrote some zsh/imagemagick to resize files and then pad
them to a specific image file resolution, however the color of
the rectangle, if I set that to "black" (or #00) the colors
get screwed up.
If I set it to #01 tho it works, have no idea why.
Here is the source, the
$ uname -a
Linux grumpy5 5.10.0-19-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.149-2 (2022-10-21) x86_64
GNU/Linux
$ cat /etc/debian_version
11.5
$ dpkg -l imagemagick
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
|
Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst
On 1/17/22, deloptes wrote:
> local10 wrote:
>
>> Those who suggest that you use google are not your friends. You can start
>> here:
>>
>> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google
>>
>> 2. https://nomoregoogle.com/
>>
>
> Oh come on, it is a synonym for a search engine. Of course it is
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:29:39PM +0100, deloptes wrote:
> local10 wrote:
>
> > Those who suggest that you use google are not your friends. You can start
> > here:
> >
> > 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google
> >
> > 2. https://nomoregoogle.com/
> >
>
> Oh come on, it is a syn
local10 wrote:
> Those who suggest that you use google are not your friends. You can start
> here:
>
> 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Google
>
> 2. https://nomoregoogle.com/
>
Oh come on, it is a synonym for a search engine. Of course it is a sh*t
business model they have toward
Jan 17, 2022, 04:01 by moasenw...@zoho.eu:
> local10 wrote:
>
>>> Is google broken where you live?
>>>
>>
>> It's 2022, who in the right mind would use g**gle nowadays?!
>>
>
> ...
>
> Didn't this use to be a friendly place?
>
Those who suggest that you use google are not your friends. You can s
Jan 17, 2022, 00:47 by emanoil.kot...@deloptes.org:
> Is google broken where you live?
>
It's 2022, who in the right mind would use g**gle nowadays?!
https://nomoregoogle.com/
Emanuel Berg wrote:
> attempt to perform an operation not allowed by the security policy `PDF' @
> error/constitute.c/IsCoderAuthorized/421
Is google broken where you live?
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1127260/imagemagick-convert-not-allowed
--
FCD6 3719 0FFB F1BF 38EA 4727 534
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 03:35:38PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> FVWM. The (undecorated) widget always pops up at the same position
> relative to where the image window first popped up even if the latter
> has been moved or resized. This can be inconvenient at times such as
> when the image is large
songbird writes:
> which desktop?
FVWM. The (undecorated) widget always pops up at the same position
relative to where the image window first popped up even if the latter
has been moved or resized. This can be inconvenient at times such as
when the image is large. "-geometry" helps but doesn't e
John Hasler wrote:
> How do I relocate the command widget for the Imagemagick "display"
> command? It always gets mapped under my StaysOnTop widgets (clock, etc.)
which desktop?
songbird
John Hasler wrote:
> How do I relocate the command widget for the Imagemagick "display"
> command? It always gets mapped under my StaysOnTop widgets (clock, etc.)
Your window manager should avoid that for you, but since it
doesn't -- almost all X11 commands take
-geo
How do I relocate the command widget for the Imagemagick "display"
command? It always gets mapped under my StaysOnTop widgets (clock, etc.)
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
ImageMagick (IM) seems to be needed (at least on XFCE desktop) for
the PDF printer (cups-filters). There are many apparent rdepends of
IM, from a2ps and devede to inkscape and sunclock.
ImageMagick in Debian stable is a bit of a bush pig, dominating the
/usr/bin default PATH namespace with a
10/24/17 15:09:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200
> >>>> Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your
> >>>>> original mail.
>
Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote on 10/30/17 15:54:
> Richard Hector wrote on 10/30/17 11:13:
>
>> imagemagick-6.q16 Provides: imagemagick, but not a specific version
>>
>> cups-filters Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~)
>>
>> The real imagemagick package is at 8:6
Richard Hector wrote on 10/30/17 11:13:
> imagemagick-6.q16 Provides: imagemagick, but not a specific version
>
> cups-filters Depends: imagemagick (>= 6.4~)
>
> The real imagemagick package is at 8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1 (on my
> machine anyway), which satisifies the cu
>> Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original
>>>>> mail.
>>>>> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only
>>>>> recommends i
ot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original
> >>> mail.
> >>> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only
> >>> recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in
> >>> /etc/
t; On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only
>>> recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in
>>> /etc/apt/apt.conf.
>>> Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed.
>>
>> Interesting, thank
Celejar wrote on 10/24/17 15:09:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200
> Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
>
>> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original
>> mail.
>> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only
>
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:34:23 +0100
Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 20/10/17 05:00, Celejar wrote:
> > The description of the imagemagick package (8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1)
> > on my Stable system includes the statements:
> >
> > "This is a dummy package. You can safely p
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 08:52:46 +0200
Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original mail.
> On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only
> recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false&qu
I forgot that you showed the dependency on cups-filters in your original mail.
On testing cups-filters 1.17.9-1 does not depend on imagemagick, it only
recommends it. And I use APT::Install-Recommends "false"; in /etc/apt/apt.conf.
Therefore, on this system imagemagick could be removed
se a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
> >>> imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed. I
> >>> think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16. And then show
> >>> the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please. I thin
On 10/23/2017 06:24 PM, Celejar wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100
Roger Lynn wrote:
On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed.
I think it's better
On 2017-10-23 at 19:24, Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100 Roger Lynn
> wrote:
>
>> On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
>>
>>> Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
>>> imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:23:46 +0100
Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> > Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
> > imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed.
> > I think it's better to re
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 11:58:53 +0200
Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
> imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed.
> I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16.
Done.
> And then show the outp
On 23/10/17 11:00, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
> imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed.
> I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16.
> And then show the output when trying to purge im
Since I use a pure 64-bit system, I overlooked that only one of
imagemagick-6.q16 or imagemagick-6.q16:i386 can be installed.
I think it's better to re-install imagemagick-6.q16.
And then show the output when trying to purge imagemagick, please.
I think there must be involved a i386 versi
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 23:22:55 +0200
Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> Celejar wrote on 10/20/17 19:05:
> > Thanks. Okay, I did that, and I was then able to remove imagemagick,
> but
> only
> > if imagemagick:i386 is installed instead - and that's also marked as a
> >
On 20/10/17 05:00, Celejar wrote:
> The description of the imagemagick package (8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1)
> on my Stable system includes the statements:
>
> "This is a dummy package. You can safely purge or remove it."
>
> But trying to remove it rips out cups, b
Celejar wrote on 10/20/17 19:05:
> Thanks. Okay, I did that, and I was then able to remove imagemagick, but
only
> if imagemagick:i386 is installed instead - and that's also marked as a
> dummy package that can be safely removed or purged.
>
> At this point:
>
> ~$ apti
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:21:24 +0200
Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote:
> Take a look which imagemagick packages are installed:
>
> $ aptitude search '~iimagemagick'
>
> Probably there is a line beginning with
>
> i A imagemagick-6.q16
>
> which shall replace imag
Take a look which imagemagick packages are installed:
$ aptitude search '~iimagemagick'
Probably there is a line beginning with
i A imagemagick-6.q16
which shall replace imagemagick. Also see the dependencies of package
imagemagick:
$ dpkg -s imagemagick
So before purging image
Hi,
The description of the imagemagick package (8:6.9.7.4+dfsg-11+deb9u1)
on my Stable system includes the statements:
"This is a dummy package. You can safely purge or remove it."
But trying to remove it rips out cups, because:
~$ aptitude why imagemagick
i cups De
ich I could not get imagemagick to let go, that is why
I had to remove the whole imagemagick package from the PC with some domino
effect. Regards, H. E.
On Wed 06 Jul 2016 at 10:32:10 (-0400), H. E. Çitak wrote:
> Dear Debian Users, imagemagick-q16 takes grabs pdf "helper" ay as default
> position,
I can't parse 'imagemagick-q16 takes grabs pdf "helper" ay as default position'
> and when you u
Dear Debian Users, imagemagick-q16 takes grabs pdf "helper" ay as default
position, and when you uninstall it, takesout gnuift and inkscape in
synaptic. Are these behaviors warranted somehow?
So it turns out the policy.xml files are different between the two versions
and removing the restrictions on @ in /etc/ImageMagick-6/policy.xml almost
works. Well, it does work to read from files, but not from stdin.
Interesting. I went back and downloaded the source tarball that the armhf
deb
I have been having some issues getting captions to work with imagemagick on
an armhf machine. As per
http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/text/#caption_paragraphs I was trying to
get the captions to read in from a file.
On my amd64 machine, the following works and prompts on stdin for the
caption
On 2016-03-02, wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:22:21PM +0100, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
>> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 13:09 +, Curt wrote:
>> > I don't how to solve this problem. Why an open source program would
>> > ask
>> > for a proprietary font in order to work is beyond my comprehension.
>
On 2016-03-02, wrote:
>
> To slowly crawl near, try
>
> display -font '-b&h-*-*-r-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*'
>
> (I'm assuming you've got some b&h fonts, like lucida -- otherwise use
> a font spec of an existing font; in a pinch, make sure you have the
> program xfontsel and you can do:
>
> display
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 05:22:21PM +0100, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 13:09 +, Curt wrote:
> > I don't how to solve this problem. Why an open source program would
> > ask
> > for a proprietary font in order to work is beyond my c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 03:54:26PM +, Curt wrote:
> On 2016-03-02, wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 01:09:54PM +, Curt wrote:
> >>
> >> Trying to run the 'display' command from ImageMagick w
On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 13:09 +, Curt wrote:
> I don't how to solve this problem. Why an open source program would
> ask
> for a proprietary font in order to work is beyond my comprehension.
I doubt it needs it, it wouldn't be in Debian main if it did.
I'm guessing this is some configuration
On 2016-03-02, wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 01:09:54PM +, Curt wrote:
>>
>> Trying to run the 'display' command from ImageMagick without an argument
>> gives the following "error" (the app does not open at all):
>>
>> curty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 01:09:54PM +, Curt wrote:
>
> Trying to run the 'display' command from ImageMagick without an argument
> gives the following "error" (the app does not open at all):
>
> curty@einstein:
Trying to run the 'display' command from ImageMagick without an argument
gives the following "error" (the app does not open at all):
curty@einstein:~$ display
display.im6: unable to load font
`-microsoft-verdana-*-r-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*': Resource temporarily
unav
yet installed binary ?
ImageMagick-6.9.3-4/utilities/identify
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
My question now is: is it possible to use HDRI with the standard debian
imagemagick installation. Do I have to resort to a source code install
to get that capability.
Gary R.
magick/magick_libMagickCore_6_Q16HDRI_la-histogram.lo
I then run (without "make install"):
./utilities/identify | fgrep Features
and get
Features: Cipher DPC HDRI OpenMP
-
What do you get from the not yet installed binary ?
ImageMagick-6.9.3-4/utiliti
with a standard
>> debian install.
>
> I don't think you can. There's a bug about HDRI support that has been
> marked "fixed-upstream" for four years...
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=476357
I've had multiple versions of ImageMagick w
On Fri, 2016-02-19 at 10:31 -0800, Gary Roach wrote:
> That said, the identify
> function should still work but doesn't show any indication that HDRI
> exists. I still need help. How do you switch HDRI on with a standard
> debian install.
I don't think you can. There's a bug about HDRI support
. The instructions say that
after the installation that one can run the following to check the
installation:
identify -version and get a Features list that includes HDRI
Unfortunately, the only feature that shows up is DCP Modules Open MP. No
HDRI.
The ImageMagick installation must be the
the installation that one can run the following to check the
> installation:
> identify -version and get a Features list that includes HDRI
> Unfortunately, the only feature that shows up is DCP Modules Open MP. No
> HDRI.
> The ImageMagick installation must be there or ide
Hi,
Gary Roach wrote:
> the only feature that shows up is DCP Modules Open MP. No HDRI.
Does "identify -version" report the same version number as the tarball ?
(I.e. did you get rid of the older binaries properly ?)
If so, then you will have to contact the ImageMagick projec
see ./configure after the step
cd ImageMagick-6.9.3
Well, the base instruction seems slightly outdated.
Currently the file
http://www.imagemagick.org/download/ImageMagick.tar.gz
unpacks to directory
ImageMagick-6.9.3-4
So my proposal for modified instructions is:
cd $HOME
mkdir
directory unpacked from a source tarball.
So the instruction
./configure --enable-hdri
in
http://www.imagemagick.org/script/high-dynamic-range.php
is most probably a modification instruction for
http://www.imagemagick.org/script/install-source.php
where you can see ./configure after the step
cd Im
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:11:03AM -0800, Gary Roach wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone have experience with setting up High Dynamic Range
> Imaging with ImageMagick. The instructions say to run ./configure
> --enable-hdri at the command line. On Debian Stretch with KDE desktop
>
Hi all,
Does anyone have experience with setting up High Dynamic Range Imaging
with ImageMagick. The instructions say to run ./configure --enable-hdri
at the command line. On Debian Stretch with KDE desktop and bash konsole
this returns command not found. This is the only procedure that I
of memory killer (oom) is doing it? I would guess so in this case.
How much memory is it using? You might need more VM space. You might
be able to allocate more swap to avoid the limit.
> can someone help me, how to convert 173 jpg files [~100 MByte] to one
> pdf, _NOT_ using imagemagick?
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 07:20:36PM +0200, Jozsef Vadkan wrote:
>
> can someone help me, how to convert 173 jpg files [~100 MByte] to one
> pdf, _NOT_ using imagemagick?
>
Are you able to convert the images into individual PDFs without
crashing? If so, you could use pdftk to merge t
OMG. I didn't know that. [gthumb]
IT worked!!
Thank you!!
On 10 October 2010 20:52, Camaleón wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 19:20:36 +0200, Jozsef Vadkan wrote:
>
> (...)
>
>> can someone help me, how to convert 173 jpg files [~100 MByte] to one
>> pdf, _NOT_ using i
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 19:20:36 +0200, Jozsef Vadkan wrote:
(...)
> can someone help me, how to convert 173 jpg files [~100 MByte] to one
> pdf, _NOT_ using imagemagick?
With GNOME or KDE is quite easy.
Go to the folder you have all the JPG files and select all the files,
right click an
..but there are no working solution with wine [several is just
a virus according to virustotal...trojans, etc..]
can someone help me, how to convert 173 jpg files [~100 MByte] to one
pdf, _NOT_ using imagemagick?
Thank you!
Did you try sam2p?
http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=sam2p
-
al is just
a virus according to virustotal...trojans, etc..]
can someone help me, how to convert 173 jpg files [~100 MByte] to one
pdf, _NOT_ using imagemagick?
Thank you!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 15:04:28 +0200, Ben wrote:
> 2009/4/5 Ansgar Burchardt:
>
> > apt-file can search for files in packages that are not installed on the
> > local machine:
> >
> > % apt-file search /usr/bin/MagickWand-config
> > libmagickwand-dev: /usr/bin/MagickWand-config
>
> Thanks for
2009/4/5 Ansgar Burchardt
> apt-file can search for files in packages that are not installed on the
> local machine:
>
> % apt-file search /usr/bin/MagickWand-config
> libmagickwand-dev: /usr/bin/MagickWand-config
Thanks for the fast reply but this isn't working for me.
relay:/usr/bin# apt-fi
Hi,
Ben writes:
> where is the binary called "MagickWand-config"? Can't find it in any
> package or source belonging to this.
apt-file can search for files in packages that are not installed on the
local machine:
% apt-file search /usr/bin/MagickWand-config
libmagickwand-dev: /usr/bin/Magi
Hi,
where is the binary called "MagickWand-config"? Can't find it in any package
or source belonging to this.
Thanks
Regards,
Ben
* Bob Cox (2009-01-11):
> I want to resize jpeg images (in order to create thumbnail images for a
> webpage) from a bash script and know that I can use 'convert' from the
> imagemagick package to achieve this. This will be run on a (headless,
> no X) lenny/armel NSLU2
d know that I can use 'convert' from the
> > > imagemagick package to achieve this. This will be run on a (headless,
> > > no X) lenny/armel NSLU2 "slug".
> >
> > GIMP ships with a second binary called gimp-console. This binary is a
> >
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 07:40:37AM -0500, Paul Cartwright wrote:
> > I want to resize jpeg images (in order to create thumbnail images for a
> > webpage) from a bash script and know that I can use 'convert' from the
> > imagemagick package to achieve this. This will b
On Sun January 11 2009, Bob Cox wrote:
> I want to resize jpeg images (in order to create thumbnail images for a
> webpage) from a bash script and know that I can use 'convert' from the
> imagemagick package to achieve this. This will be run on a (headless,
> no X) l
I want to resize jpeg images (in order to create thumbnail images for a
webpage) from a bash script and know that I can use 'convert' from the
imagemagick package to achieve this. This will be run on a (headless,
no X) lenny/armel NSLU2 "slug".
However, aptitude says that to
Florian Kulzer wrote:
> $ aptitude why imagemagick libqt4-core
> i imagemagick Dependslibmagick10
> i A libmagick10 Dependslibdjvulibre21 (>= 3.5.20)
> i A libdjvulibre21Recommends djvulibre-desktop
> i A djvulibre-desktop Recommends djview4 | djview3
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 10:17:45PM +0530, mwnn wrote:
> Hi,
>I am using Debian lenny. When installing imagemagick, the apt-get
> package management utility seems to be installing "libqt4-*" stuff
> (which
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 22:17:45 +0530, mwnn wrote:
> Hi,
>I am using Debian lenny. When installing imagemagick, the apt-get
> package management utility seems to be installing "libqt4-*" stuff
> (which
Hi,
I am using Debian lenny. When installing imagemagick, the apt-get
package management utility seems to be installing "libqt4-*" stuff
(which I think is unnecessary).
/*/
bash# apt-get install imagemagi
rienta
Orientation |right - top
$> exif img_6696_small.jpg | grep -i orienta
Orientation |
$>
So, as shown above, the resulting image has the orientation information
discarded. Is this the expected behavior or a bug in imagemagick? I am
using imagemagick ver 7:6.3.7.9.dfsg1-2+b1
d compiled the source. Everything is working fine. Will
> wait till the debs enter the repos.
How old is the current version of Imagemagick in testing? Any idea if
it will fix this known issue:
convert MOV02039.MPG +adjoin test_%d.gif
sh: mpeg2decode: command not found
convert: Delegate failed `&q
On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 05:45:18PM +0200, Florian Kulzer wrote:
>
> See bug #420672, followup 4.
>
Thanks. Checked that. It was in April 2007 and we still have no idea
when it might be uploaded. Not blaming anyone.
Downloaded and compiled the source. Everything is working fine. Will
wai
I do not know whether this has been answered or not (for I could not
find anything in the archives) : Is there any reason that the newer
version of imagemagick is not even in the unstables branch?
Regards,
--
Sridhar M.A. GPG KeyID : F6A35935
Fingerprint: D172
On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 21:00:07 +0530, Sridhar M.A. wrote:
> I do not know whether this has been answered or not (for I could not
> find anything in the archives) : Is there any reason that the newer
> version of imagemagick is not even in the unstables branch?
See bug #420672, f
to Anthony's helpful Text to Image Handling Examples
http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/graphics/imagick6/
Check it out. Want to use the font of your own? No problem. Want to use
Chinese font? No problem, there is even an example right using Chinese
font. Want to use a font without registering to
Dear all,
I want to use the '-font' option of convert to annotate images. I'm not
sure if convert can deal with locales other than iso-8859, and what's the
syntax of the font name? Will an X font name like "-
misc-zysong18030-medium-r-normal--0-0-0-0-p-0-gb2312.1980-0" be accepted? In
the exampl
If I import the entire desktop, saved image sizes seem sensible. Not quite
exact but very close.
If I import a rectangular selected area: With no options, the correct image is
displaced into a larger area and clipped. I can get the image to be sensible
by specifying geomentry such as -geometry
On 12/07/2004 04:20 PM, Otto Wyss wrote:
I tried to create a screen shot of my appliaction with import. That
worked somehow when I clicked into the window. This way I can't show any
menu so I added a "-delay 500" and tried to switch to the window of my
app but the Alt-TAB didn't work at all until t
Jacob S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 21:57:42 +0100
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Otto Wyss) wrote:
>
> > someone able to make screen shots showing the menu?
>
> Works great with File -> Acquire -> Screen Shot in Gimp. Sorry, I'm not
> that familiar with ImageMagick's import tool.
>
H
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> scrot is :
>
Nice, it only should have a -w option which captures the top window.
O. Wyss
--
Development of frame buffer drivers: http://linux-fbdev.sf.net
Sample code snippets for wxWidgets: http://wxcode.sf.net
How to build well-designed applications:
1 - 100 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
