Commons:Graphics village pump/October 2007

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

pattern and patternUnits = objectBoundingBox in svg file[edit]

Has someone ever be able to use a pattern element in a cvs file with the attribute patternUnits sets to objectBoundingBox?

I have done many tests, but I was never been able to obtain what I want. And every page that I have seen over the web always make example with patternUnits="userSpaceOnUse" (even if the objectBoundingBox should be the default [1]).

Am I doing something completely wrong or is it a bug of the program I use to view the image (inkview and Inkscape version 0.44.1 (Sep 25 2006)) or is it that the specifications of the svg have something messed up?

And for instance I would be glad to have a way to specify x and y attribute in objectBoundingBox coordinate, but to choose the width and the height in userSpaceOnUse coordinate, and these seems not be possible according to the specs.

Do you know where can I find a forum or any other place where svg issue like that can be discussed? -- AnyFile 13:06, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Accepted method for repairing scans of old photographs[edit]

Moved from COM:VP Siebrand 06:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I was looking around to see what is considered a success repair process for scans of old photographs when I found this pair:

It seems that this photograph was improved this way:

  1. scale the image down to 25%
  2. boost saturation 30%
  3. boost contrast 10% and
  4. boost brightness 5%
  5. apply unsharp mask

Bubbles, blisters, scratches and gouges scanned from the original photograph simply disappear and no cloning or other tools are used.

Is this the best approach as well as the most accepted? Or, did I get the whole thing wrong? -- thanks carol 18:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


I don't have a problem with using the original as it is, but if I did feel the need to clean it up, for that picture, I think I'd just crop it - I don't really see any bad imperfections in the area it was cropped to. ¦ Reisio 06:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I might disagree. I have had a few hours to think about it. I am going to see how things print before I know my feelings about this. It seems a shame to start with such a large image and end up with such a smaller version. -- carol 07:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Carol, your method adds without any doubt extra value to the picture. This deserves certainly further investigation. I think with a bit less scale down, more clever unsharp methods and algorithms that ease the removal of the black and the white spots, you may reach a quality approaching the marvellous bromide photographs we don't see anymore in our grayish colour world. I think that there is somewhere an image lab here in the commons that might provide exiting assistance. Please keep us informed: a semi-automatic method or flow might be very valuable for many photographs here. --Foroa 07:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, that isn't my method, I think that it is the method that was used with this image. I would have (and did) lightly use a soft and usually small clone to repair the scratches and things. I am awaiting 5 12x18 inch prints to see if I hurt or helped the image. (3 of them are edited by me, one original and one of the beautifully edited image here). I did something very stupid though, I color corrected the original image first and then cloned & repaired and then color corrected again. I feel like the 8 to 12 hours spent inbetween were kind of a waste because of that. Repair first and then color correct -- and I actually know this. I uploaded the version that looks the best on this computer. When I see the prints, I will exchange it or perhaps request that it is deleted. Much fun, regardless! -- carol 04:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
A black and white picture can only be judged on a decent print. Looking forward to your conclusions. --Foroa 07:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I uploaded the print that came out the best (meaning, I guessed the wrong version). It printed beautifully as an 18x12 inch print and it really looked better than the version used for the Featured Picture. I was frankly very surprised when that version printed as such a large photograph. The higher resolution image would probably easily print on as a poster from a machine able to print such sizes. I put different versions on my web site because perhaps others have different ideas about what contrast level makes a good print or digital image. And further, this discussion that I started at the village pump was somewhat of a joke because I suspect that a lot of "experts" have to have Photoshop to accomplish what GIMP can do with that somewhat sarcastic script I put on my user page here. I like it when joking and sarcasm can have really productive output. It is rare in my life. This was fun! -- carol 03:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
http://carol.gimp.org/GIMP/2007/Oct/index.html#repair for xcf and more information. -- carol 05:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Great. Question: the best quality you had: does it corresponds with the threatment as you describe above (scale down to 25 %, ...). Do all bubbles and scratches disappear without extra work ? Would such a treatment be possible for mere mortals that don't understand scripts and are fluent with for example Google Picasa ? --Foroa 10:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Chemical structure SVG files not rendering properly?[edit]

Hi all. I'm new to the commons, and have been trying to upload vector versions of various chemical structures, but the thumbnails don't seem to be rendering properly. This has happened on Image:Thebaine.svg and Image:Oripavine.svg. Initially, these images were exported directly to SVG from MarvinSketch v4.1.13, and I unsuccessfully attempted to fix the problem by exporting to PNG and converting to SVG in Inkscape v0.45.1. Purging doesn't seem to do anything. I know there have been rendering problems in the past, but I wasn't sure if there is something I'm doing wrong. Any help would be greatly appreciated. St3vo 16:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I know this sucks, I have the same problem: Image:Afghanistan admin.svg. Jackaranga 11:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
In Inkscape, try converting the lines to paths (Ctrl+C+Alt) it should work then > Rugby471 talk 16:46, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
The line elements should actually give no problem. I have see that it is not using the standard SVG in version 1.1 and I have see there is in some attributes I have never seen in the SVG 1.1 specifications. I would try to just open the file in inkscape (or similar) an saving it as a new file (as plain SVG). If I have time I will do some more investigations on these images (not today, I am afraid) -- AnyFile 19:27, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I revalidated using the SVG 1.1 specs, and the only difference was the doctype declaration, so I changed it to make both Image:Thebaine.svg and Image:Oripavine.svg valid SVG 1.1 according to the W3.org. Again, no difference. I tried to save as plain SVG as you suggested rather than the default Inkscape SVG (see the inkscape wiki), but the canvas goes all black, and when I reopen the file, Inkscape renders the image just as the PNG thumbnail here, without molecules' 3-ring backbone. Presumeably, something is lost or unrecognized between the Inkscape/Batik SVGs and "plain svg," although they all conform to the specs. Any thoughts on what that might be? St3vo 14:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Inkscape text rendering problems[edit]

When I insert text in Inkscape, it shows while still editing in Inkscape, but not when displayed in Firefox or when uploaded to commons. Is this a typical problem with a workaround, or just me? Reuvenk 19:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you are forcing a particular font that is not available here. Try to give a list of fonts to be use alternatively. And try to give some generic family.
What images are you referring to? -- AnyFile 19:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:HKSARFlagConstructionSheet.png.svg is giving me problems. The font is Arial, so that shouldn't be the problem. Also, the picture is slated for deletion, per my request, so if it disappears, I'll re upload it. Reuvenk 19:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually Arial is not among the fonts listed at m:SVG fonts, try to add sans-serif to the font-family. -- AnyFile 20:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
You've lost me...In the font dialog in inkscape, there's a long list of fonts listed under "font-family." Additionally, "sans," and "serif" are both options, but not together. Also, I looked at the source code, and it seems to me that there's nothing there to indicate that the numbers should be displayed as text. Thanks for the help! Reuvenk 20:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Well I too do not know how to select two fonts using inkscape (I usually edit svg file with a text editor). But I have noticed some interesting point
  • Your file has no <text> element.
  • Your svg file is not version 1.1 svg file but 1.0
  • There are some reference to fonts but in <flowRoot> elements not in <text> element (and I do not know what a <flowRoot> is, since there is no such element in a version 1.1 svg specification)
All all this is confusing me too. By the way try to name the file just HKSARFlagConstructionSheet.svg (with no .png) -- AnyFile 21:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
i am little bit confused. Inkscape seems to declare the file at version 1.0, but then use things like flowRoot that is version 1.2 (a version that has not yet reached the level of Recommendation in the W3C TR scheme). All I can suggest you is to try to substitute the font you used (Arial) with one that is listed in the page m:SVG fonts or to substitute with the font sans-serif. If you cannot do that from inkscape, open the file with a text editor and just substitute every word Arial with the word sans-serif . -- AnyFile 22:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
First, thanks for all the help. I'm relativly new here, and I really appreciate it. Second, I tried your suggestions, but to no avail. The only change that had any success was when I opened the file in Notepad, and globally replaced the <flowroot> elements with <text> elements. This gave me big black rectangles where the text should have been. Also, I found an interesting thing on inkscape's site: [2]. Could this be the cause of the problem? Regarding the filename, that's my mistake...I had originally put in a RFD because of the wrong name, but then we started to discuss it, I removed the request. Reuvenk 07:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, direct substituting <flowroot> elements with <text> elements was not suppose to work (I think this can be done, but it is a little bit tricking, what you should transform into <text> is what is now inside <flowPara> element, but you need to find a way to get the right coordinate.
One difficult in understanding the problem is that we have two problems here. One related to font (is font Arial supported here on commons?) and the other related to the use of flowRoot/flowPara instead of just the <text> element. I can not understand what have you tried, and I can not see the result of the transformed png. So what I am going to do is to take 18:37, 6 October 2007 version of your image and to change (with a text editor) all reference to Arail to some other font and to upload it to see if it works this way. -- AnyFile 10:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. I see you've already uploaded a new version, and it still doesn't display properly. Please do whatever to the file...I just want this to come out OK. Reuvenk 13:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope this is the right place to ask for video help?[edit]

I have tried in vain to convert a public domain Ram file to ogg video format using Super-c. Super-c tells me "Invalid video format!" and opens a message box that says ".RAM 66". The file plays fine in RealPlayer.

Who can help me convert this file, so that I can upload it and use it in a Wikipedia article?

Thank you,

--Ravpapa 11:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[3]

Later: forget it, I got it to work. Not simple, this business. --Ravpapa 12:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[4]
Ok, but it would have been better to ask using the "Add Topic" link on Commons:Graphics village pump.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Imbeded binary images in SVG files not rendered properly[edit]

PNG version
SVG version

The above 2 plots should be the same. They look identical in Inkscape and other viewers I have on my PC. However in SVG versions browsers seem to render the colorbar on the right incorrectly. Is that a bug in Netscape & IE, a bug in wiki software, or a bug in Inkscape that generated final version of this file? Are there any easy fixes? I have a few more plots I would like to recreate as SVG:

-- Jarekt 15:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

SVG Chinese font[edit]

Hi, I'm making SVG route map for Hong Kong railway but soon encounter the problem that some character does not exist in the Chinese fonts library provided by meta. Here's the example

Tsuen Wan Line.svg

The character "埗" of "深水埗" (Sham Shui Po) is missing. Neither AR PL Mingti2L Big5 nor AR PL KaitiM Big5 will show that word. -- Sameboat - 同舟 13:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I am afraid that the only thing you can try is to check if these characters are present in any of the font listed in m:SVG fonts . If there is no fonts where these characters are present, the only way to solve this problem would be to install a new font (a not so easy thing). -- AnyFile 15:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
That's what I hope. An updated Chinese font. Isn't that Wikia encouraging user to apply the SVG format? "埗" should not be considered a "rare" character and thus be ignored. -- Sameboat - 同舟 23:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

How aggressively should I crop?[edit]

I'm sometimes unsure how much to crop. For instance, is the cropping from Image:Rhinoceros in South Africa.JPG to Image:Rhinoceros in South Africa cropped.jpg (ignoring the color-improvement) a sensible choice, or should I have left it uncropped? Are there any guidelines or rules of thumb on how aggressively images should be cropped? -- Ddxc 00:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I can hardly see the difference between those 2 versions. In my non-expert opinion the original crop was just fine. There is a danger in over cropping, and I often see cropped versions of historical images where original versions were much better. --Jarekt 11:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

SVG file not rendering[edit]

British Direction Sign 1.svg

For some reason, the image Image:British Direction Sign 1.svg is not rendering properly, instead appearing as text. I understand this problem has occured before, but generally, just purging or reuploading the file is enough to the fix it. I can't see any obvious problems with the file, and it looks fine when rendered manually by FireFox. The file is quite big for an SVG at almost 0.5 Mb (because the typeface I used is a bit scruffy, so the path formed is very rough); could this be what causes the problem? Smurrayinchester 13:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess the only cure is to upload the file with different name. I have encountered the similar situation. Moreover the (nominated) delete and then re-upload doesn't solve the problem. Allow me to suggest, using PNG format with low color depth (7 colors w/o anti-alias edge I would say) is far smaller for its original size. -- Sameboat - 同舟 02:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Problem was a reference to a local BMP (a la "C:\...") (the castle icon). While in principle this would not be a problem in other SVG renderers (Firefox seemed to render ignoring this), RSVG might have panicked when it discovered that the BMP was not there. I removed it, and it now works! ButterStick 08:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Linking directly to images[edit]

I've been asked to confirm a rumor that Wikimedia Commons has a policy forbidding linking directly to images due to licensing reasons. Links have to use the image pages. I honestly don't have a clue, how about you commons regulars? --Kizor 20:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

For the record, this is "linking" including "giving an URL on IRC." --Kizor 20:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)