Watermark "by offset" misplaced

Bug #413271 reported by X_FISH
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Phatch
Fix Released
Critical
Stani

Bug Description

Using 0.2.0.bzr936 with Ubuntu 9.04 (64 bit), I have experienced an odd behavior.

I think it is supposed like in version 0.1.x: positive integer -> offset by the left or top, negative integer -> offset by the right or bottom.

I took the phatch logo to stamp it on a picture. To give a integer less or more than zero, I chose "5".

See the pictures in the attachment showing the results.

Greetings, Martin

Revision history for this message
X_FISH (martin-gaskutsche) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Stani (stani) wrote :

Thanks for your concerns. For every bug report you should include the action list(s) as an attachment. I could reconstruct them from your screenshot, but it is faster for me if you include them. So could you attach them?
In Phatch 0.2 we addressed an user request who wanted to center watermarks on a picture. So the position system has changed from 0.1 which means the settings from 0.1 have to be adjusted. Now it defines an offset point and you can specify the alignment. Can you try again by adjusting your alignment as now you specify you to align the watermark centered which is not appropriate for corners:
- top left corner: left horizontal, top vertical
- top right corner: right horizontal, top vertical
etc ...

Changed in phatch:
assignee: nobody → stani (stani)
status: New → Incomplete
Revision history for this message
X_FISH (martin-gaskutsche) wrote :

Working fine (horizontal and vertical justification "middle"):

5px horizontal, 5px vertical, watermark is placed on the top left corner

-5px horizontal, 5px vertical, watermark is placed on the top right corner

5px horizontal, -5px vertical, watermark is placed on the bottom left corner

Not working:

-5px horizontal, -5px vertical

 watermark is placed on the top right corner (with an offset) instead of being placed on the bottom right corner

--8<--- snipp --
Warning 0:
Failed to save metadata to /home/martin/data/bilder/0908_august/0_phatch__neu.jpg:
pyexiv2: TIFF array element tag 43 has wrong type
Trying again by ignoring tags with following pattern:
Exif[.]Canon

Action: {'fields': {'As': u'<type>',
            'File Name': u'<filename>_neu',
            'In': u'<folder>',
            'JPEG Quality': u'85',
            'JPEG Size Maximum': '0kb',
            'JPEG Size Tolerance': '5%',
            'Metadata': 'yes',
            'PNG Optimize': 'no',
            'Resolution': u'<dpi>',
            'Show Type Options': 'no',
            'TIFF Compression': u'<compression>',
            '__enabled__': 'yes'},
 'label': 'Save'}

None
*

-->8--- snapp --

Greetings, martin

Revision history for this message
X_FISH (martin-gaskutsche) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Stani (stani) wrote :

Thanks for finding this wonderful bug. I'll have a look how to fix it.

Changed in phatch:
importance: Undecided → Critical
status: Incomplete → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Stani (stani) wrote :

I've committed a fix in my ppa (will be available in some minutes). Moreover I've redesigned the watermark/text/... actions to be more user friendly. Now you can specify: top left, bottom right, ... with an optional distance as well. Please try it out and let me know if it works for you.

Changed in phatch:
status: Confirmed → Fix Committed
Stani (stani)
Changed in phatch:
milestone: none → 0.2.1
status: Fix Committed → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
X_FISH (martin-gaskutsche) wrote :

I am sorry, but I had a lot of problems with my health and my computer, so I had not the time to test it further.

But: After upgrading to Mint 8 and using Phatch 0.2.4: No problem so far. Offset seems to work fine for me and the positions that I need on the pictures for my websites.

Also the exif-information is being available in the saved Image as well.

Link to one example (also one of my PC problems):

http://www.x-fish.org/blog_picture/091214_01.jpg

Greetings, Martin

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.