HI i have flex + php app.
Also i understand that i only get 96dpi from image, because of my monitor dpi, but I need to make sure that even it generates 96dpi, it really is 300dpi quality. Can somebody advise? I tried alivepdf, its not as good.
I am taking 28 original images from user and making a "thumbnail picture collage" out of it for printing. I dont get the crisp quality in generated collage images, compared to originals. Here are my function, can somebody help me improve my snapshot? I really need to generate photo quality images for printing. Thanks
private function createImages(object:Object):void
{
progress.text = "Start Generating Images ( "+(index+1)+" - 28 )";
images_array.push(ImageSnapshot.captureImage(album.tilesList[index],30 0,new PNGEncoder()));
}
private function uploadImage(snapshot:ImageSnapshot,name:String):void
{
var ba:ByteArray = snapshot.data;//PNGEnc.encode(snapshot);
//send data as normal files
ba.position = 0;
var ID:String = name;
var filename:String = ID+".png";
}
A monitor is 72dpi. If you want 300 dpi you should scale the image inside the pdf.
Your scale ratio should be 1 / (300 / 72) = 0.24;
So if you put the image inside a clip and set scaleX and scaleY to 0.24 and make a pdf of it; it 'is' 300dpi.
Related
As a newbie to the google earth engine, I have been trying something (https://code.earthengine.google.com/6f45059a59b75757c88ce2d3869fc9fd) following a NASA tutorial (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFvxudueT_k&ab_channel=NASAVideo). My last line (line 60) shows image.filter is not a function, while the one in the tutorial (line 34) is working. I am not sure what happened and how to sort this out?
//creating a new variable 'image' from the L8 collection data imported
var image = ee.Image (L8_tier1 //the details in the data will represent that the band resolution is 30m
//the details in the data will represent that the band resolution is 30m
//.filterDate ("2019-07-01","2021-10-03") //for a specific date range. maybe good to remove it for the function.
//the details in the data will represent that the band resolution is 30m
//the details in the data will represent that the band resolution is 30m
//.filterDate ("2019-07-01","2021-10-03") //for a specific date range. maybe good to remove it for the function.
.filterBounds (ROI) //for the region of interest we are interested in
//.sort ("COLUD_COVER") //for sorting the data between the range with a cloud cover, the metadata property we are interested in. Other way to do this is using the function below.
//.first() //this will make the image choose the first image with the least amount of cloud cover for the area. Other way to do this is using the function below.
);
//print ("Hague and Rotterdam", image); //printing the image in the console
//console on the right hand side will explain everything from the data
//id will show the image deatils and date of the image, for this case 29th July 2019
//under the properties tab cloud cover can be found, this is the least we can get for this area during this period
// //vizualisation of the data in the map with true color rendering
// var trueColour = {
// bands:["SR_B4","SR_B3","SR_B2"],
// min: 5000,
// max: 12000
// };
// Map.centerObject (ROI, 12); //for the centering the area in the center of the map with required zoom level
// Map.addLayer (image, trueColour, "Hague and Rotterdam"); //for adding the image with the variable of bands we made and naming the image
//Alternate way
//Function to cloud mask from the qa_pixel band of Landsat 8 SR data. In this case bits 3 and 4 are clouds and cloud shadow respectively. This can be different for different image sets.
function maskL8sr(image) {
var cloudsBitMask = 1 << 3; //remember to check this with the source
var cloudshadowBitMask = 1 << 4; //remember to check this with the source
var qa = image.select ('qa_pixel'); //creating the new variable from the band of the source image
var mask = qa.bitwiseAnd(cloudsBitMask).eq(0) //making the cloud equal to zero to mask them out
.and(qa.bitwiseAnd(cloudshadowBitMask).eq(0)); //making the cloud shadow equal to zero to mask them out
return image.updateMask(mask).divide(10000)
.select("SR_B[0-9]*")
.copyProperties(image, ["system:time_start"]);
}
// print ("Hague and Rotterdam", image);// look into the console now. How many images the code have downloaded!!!
//filtering imagery for 2015 to 2021 summer date ranges
//creating joint filter and applying to image collection
var sum21 = ee.Filter.date ('2021-06-01','2021-09-30');
var sum20 = ee.Filter.date ('2020-06-01','2020-09-30');
var sum19 = ee.Filter.date ('2019-06-01','2019-09-30');
var sum18 = ee.Filter.date ('2018-06-01','2018-09-30');
var sum17 = ee.Filter.date ('2017-06-01','2017-09-30');
var sum16 = ee.Filter.date ('2016-06-01','2016-09-30');
var sum15 = ee.Filter.date ('2015-06-01','2015-09-30');
var SumFilter = ee.Filter.or(sum21, sum20, sum19, sum18, sum17, sum16, sum15);
var allsum = image.filter(SumFilter);
Filtering is an operation you can do on ImageCollections, not individual Images, because all filtering does is choose a subset of the images. Then, in your script, you have (with the comments removed):
var image = ee.Image (L8_tier1
.filterBounds (ROI)
);
The result of l8_tier1.filterBounds(ROI) is indeed an ImageCollection. But in this case, you have told the Earth Engine client that it should be treated as an Image, and it believed you. So, then, the last line
var allsum = image.filter(SumFilter);
fails with the error you saw because there is no filter() on ee.Image.
The script will successfully run if you change ee.Image(...) to ee.ImageCollection(...), or even better, remove the cast because it's not necessary — that is,
var image = L8_tier1.filterBounds(ROI);
You should probably also change the name of var image too, since it is confusing to call an ImageCollection by the name image. Naming things accurately helps avoid mistakes, while you are working on the code and also when others try to read it or build on it.
I'm using MATLAB to montage several high-resolution images together, register the overlay coordinates into a text file, then reading the text file and loading the montaged image. However, once I have the montage, the individual images making up the montage lose resolution. Is there a way to to display the montage with the full resolution of each individual image still intact?
Here is the code.
file = 'ImageFile.txt';
info = importdata(file);
ImageNames = info.textdata(:,1);
xoffset = info.data(:,1);
yoffset = info.data(:,2);
for i=1:length(ImageNames)
diffx(i) = xoffset(length(ImageNames),1) - xoffset(i,1);
end
diffx = (diffx)';
for j=1:length(ImageNames)
diffy(j) = yoffset(length(ImageNames),1) - yoffset(j,1);
end
diffy = (diffy)';
colormap(gray(256));
for k=1:length(ImageNames)
imshow(ImageNames{k,1}, 'XData', [diffx(k,1) (size(ImageNames{1},2) + diffx(k,1))], 'YData',[diffy(k,1) (size(ImageNames{1}, 1) + diffy(k,1))]), hold on
end
This is the method that I used to implement montage. You might not feel the same.
I would assume that you have the co-ordinates of every image location in final montage.
Say I have to create a montage of 9 images and they are named as 1.jpg, 2.jpg, 3.jpg,... 9.jpg.
for i=1:9
filename = sprintf('%d.jpg',i);
a{i} = imread(filename);
end
montage = [a{1} a{2} a{3}; a{4} a{5} a{6}; a{7} a{8} a{9}];
imshow(montage);
imwrite(montage, 'montage.jpg');
I recently started working with [Bing Api] in my webService [wcf] in c #.
I would like to recover a satellite image of a given scale with Bing!
for example
Scale 1:200 (1 centimeter on the map equal 200 centimeters on the world)
Of course I found this function that explains how to calculate the image resolution satellite bing but this is not what I'm looking for ..
Map resolution = 156543.04 meters/pixel * cos(latitude) / (2 ^ zoomlevel)
Here is my function used to generate my bing map, but I do not know what to send parameter to retrieve an image scale of 1:200.
I need :
Scale = 1:200
I search :
int mapSizeHeight = ?
int mapSizeWidth = ?
int zoomLevel = ?
public string GetImageMap(double latitude,double longitude,int mapSizeHeight, int mapSizeWidth, int zoomLevel)
{
string key = "ddsaAaasm5vwsdfsfd2ySYBxfEFsdfsdfcFh6iUO5GI4v";
MapUriRequest mapUriRequest = new MapUriRequest();
// Set credentials using a valid Bing Maps key
mapUriRequest.Credentials = new ImageryService.Credentials();
mapUriRequest.Credentials.ApplicationId = key;
// Set the location of the requested image
mapUriRequest.Center = new ImageryService.Location();
mapUriRequest.Center.Latitude = latitude;
mapUriRequest.Center.Longitude = longitude;
// Set the map style and zoom level
MapUriOptions mapUriOptions = new MapUriOptions();
mapUriOptions.Style = MapStyle.Aerial;
mapUriOptions.ZoomLevel = zoomLevel;
mapUriOptions.PreventIconCollision = true;
// Set the size of the requested image in pixels
mapUriOptions.ImageSize = new ImageryService.SizeOfint();
mapUriOptions.ImageSize.Height = mapSizeHeight;
mapUriOptions.ImageSize.Width = mapSizeWidth;
mapUriRequest.Options = mapUriOptions;
//Make the request and return the URI
ImageryServiceClient imageryService = new ImageryServiceClient();
MapUriResponse mapUriResponse = imageryService.GetMapUri(mapUriRequest);
return mapUriResponse.Uri;
}
If you haven't already, you might want to check out this article on the Bing Maps tile system calculations, within you will find a section discussing ground resolution and map scale. From that article:
map scale = 1 : ground resolution * screen dpi / 0.0254 meters/inch
Depending on which implementation of Bing Maps you use, specifying the view via a precise map scale might not be possible. I think this is due to the fact that you don't have precise control over the zoom level. For example, in the javascript ajax version, you can only specify zoom levels in integer values, so the ground resolution part of the above equation will jump in discreet steps. At the equator, using a zoom level of 21 will give you a scale of 1: 282, and a zoom level of 22 will give you 1:141. Since you can't specify a decimal value for zoom level, it is not possible to get an exact 1:200 scale using the ajax control. I don't have extensive experience with the .net Bing Maps control, so you might want to investigate that API to see if you can specify an arbitrary zoom level.
If you can precisely control the zoom level and know the dpi value, then the 1:200 scale is achievable using the equation described in the above linked article.
Bit of a strange question and I don't know whether anyone will have come across this one before.
We have a ASP.net page generating physical thumbnail jpeg files on a filesystem and copying fullsize images to a different location. So we input one image and we get a complete copy in one location and a small image 102*68 in a different location.
We're currently looking to finally move away from IIS6 on Server 2003 to IIS7.5 on Server 2008R2, except there's on problem.
On the old system (so IIS6/Server 2003) the black borders are removed and the image stays at the correct ration. On the new system (IIS7.5/Server 2008) the thumbnails are rendered exactly as they exist in the JPEG, with black borders, but this makes the thumbnail slightly squashed and obviously includes ugly black borders.
Anyone know why this might be happening? I've done a google and can't seem to find out which behaviour is "correct". My gut tells me that the new system is correctly rendering the thumbnail as it exists, but I don't know.
Anyone have any suggestions how to solve the problem?
I think as suggested it is the .net differences. not IIS.
Just re write your code, your save a lot of time, very simple thing to do.
Here is a image handler i wrote a while ago that re draws any image to your settings.
public class image_handler : IHttpHandler
{
public void ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)
{
// set file
string ImageToDraw = context.Request.QueryString["FilePath"];
ImageToDraw = context.Server.MapPath(ImageToDraw);
// Grab images to work on's true width and height
Image ImageFromFile = Image.FromFile(ImageToDraw);
double ImageFromFileWidth = ImageFromFile.Width;
double ImageFromFileHeight = ImageFromFile.Height;
ImageFromFile.Dispose();
// Get required width and work out new dimensions
double NewHeightRequired = 230;
if (context.Request.QueryString["imageHeight"] != null)
NewHeightRequired = Convert.ToDouble(context.Request.QueryString["imageHeight"]);
double DivTotal = (ImageFromFileHeight / NewHeightRequired);
double NewWidthValue = (ImageFromFileWidth / DivTotal);
double NewHeightVale = (ImageFromFileHeight / DivTotal);
NewWidthValue = ImageFromFileWidth / (ImageFromFileWidth / NewWidthValue);
NewHeightVale = ImageFromFileHeight / (ImageFromFileHeight / NewHeightVale);
// Set new width, height
int x = Convert.ToInt16(NewWidthValue);
int y = Convert.ToInt16(NewHeightVale);
Bitmap image = new Bitmap(x, y);
Graphics g = Graphics.FromImage(image);
Image thumbnail = Image.FromFile(ImageToDraw);
// Quality Control
g.InterpolationMode = InterpolationMode.HighQualityBicubic;
g.SmoothingMode = SmoothingMode.HighQuality;
g.PixelOffsetMode = PixelOffsetMode.HighQuality;
g.CompositingQuality = CompositingQuality.HighQuality;
g.DrawImage(thumbnail, 0, 0, x, y);
g.Dispose();
image.Save(context.Response.OutputStream, ImageFormat.Jpeg);
image.Dispose();
}
public bool IsReusable
{
get
{
return true;
}
}
I want to change the size of my image in asp.net proportionally, the problem is that I can't get the actual size of the image which is loaded from database. here is the code:
imgAvatar.ImageUrl = "~/Modules/FileViewer.ashx?id=" + o.EventID;
double r = imgAvatar.Width.Value / 300.00;
imgAvatar.Width = new Unit(300, UnitType.Pixel);
imgAvatar.Height = new Unit(imgAvatar.Height.Value / r, UnitType.Pixel);
but the imgAvatar.Width.Value is always 0.0.
what would you suggest to me?
Do not set width and height. The rendered IMG tag will be sized to the size of downloaded image.
However, if the image is too large you might have a problem. In that case, use CSS to set max:
max-width: 300px;
max-height: 300px;
I might have misunderstand the question, considering my answer above. Anyways, the way I see that done would be similar to this:
System.Drawing.Image image = System.Drawing.Image.FromFile(this.Server.MapUrl("~/image path here"));
// sorry if the above line doesn't compile; writing from memory, use intellisense to find these classes/methods
// image.Width and image.Height will work here
Takes the size of the image with Bitmap and calls the below function to resize
Bitmap myBitmap;
string fileName = "foreverAlone.jpg";
myBitmap = new Bitmap(fileName);
Size newSize = NewImageSize(myBitmap.Height, myBitmap.Width, 100);//myBitMap.Height and myBitMap.Width is how you take the original size
Check BitMap class here Bitmap Class - MSDN Article
This code returns new size of the image, and image quality remains the same -no reduce-, FormatSize parameter decides the new size.
public Size NewImageSize(int OriginalHeight, int OriginalWidth, double FormatSize)
{
Size NewSize;
double tempval;
if (OriginalHeight > FormatSize && OriginalWidth > FormatSize)
{
if (OriginalHeight > OriginalWidth)
tempval = FormatSize / Convert.ToDouble(OriginalHeight);
else
tempval = FormatSize / Convert.ToDouble(OriginalWidth);
NewSize = new Size(Convert.ToInt32(tempval * OriginalWidth), Convert.ToInt32(tempval * OriginalHeight));
}
else
NewSize = new Size(OriginalWidth, OriginalHeight);
return NewSize;
}