When I mask out part of an image in Variations and attempt to apply
a filter to the rest, the effect is quite clearly visible in the
nine preview images, but double-clicking on the central square to
apply the curently selected filter no longer seems to have any
effect at all, however extreme the effect I attempt. The hourglass
comes up, and at the end of the calculation the preview picture
resets to its original display and the main 'view' is unchanged.
This is on an ARMX6 - I know Variations is an unfinished
application and has some bugs in it that I've hit before, but I'm
sure break-up filters used to take effect on previous computers.
(I've just tried the Pointillist function, and that works exactly
as expected.)
I seldom do much image editing nowdays but if I do I use !PhotoDesk
which many years ago after a long learning cuve worked reasonably well.
I vaguely remember I had difficulty in the way !Variations did thin
In article <a4568f3b5a.harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk>, Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> wrote:
When I mask out part of an image in Variations and attempt to apply
a filter to the rest, the effect is quite clearly visible in the
nine preview images, but double-clicking on the central square to
apply the curently selected filter no longer seems to have any
effect at all, however extreme the effect I attempt. The hourglass
comes up, and at the end of the calculation the preview picture
resets to its original display and the main 'view' is unchanged.
This won't solve your problem but...
Your clear instructions made me want to try it using Variations
(0.14d.39) on my ARMX6 (RISC OS 5.29)
and Filter(Break-up)/Pointillist options appears to work correctly on
the thumbnails/main image with a mask applied to it. The thing that
really confused me is that the effects are overlayed over the mask
instead of the unmasked area - probably me doing something wrong!
On 23 Oct 2022 as I do recall, Richard Ashbery wrote:
I had 0.14d.27 and have just tried downloading a fresh copy of
"0.41d (5-Feb-2008)" from the website; it still says it was last
updated on the 5th of February and there are no further changes
listed in the change log, but the application now reports itself as
0.41d.38 (I don't know where you found your .39).
And version .38 *does* apply the filter as displayed in the
preview. The version changes may well have been a bugfix for
hardware compatibility issues, as I'm fairly sure the features
worked OK on earlier hardware, and thus weren't deemed worthy of a
full new version number
(but it's confusing; I'd assumed I had the
latest version).
and Filter(Break-up)/Pointillist options appears to work
correctly on the thumbnails/main image with a mask applied to it.
The thing that really confused me is that the effects are
overlayed over the mask instead of the unmasked area - probably
me doing something wrong!
No, it always does that - 'mask' seems to be a misnomer, since it
defines the area where changes are applied rather than where they
are masked out. The manual confirms that this is the intended
effect.
I generally find myself using Invert mask all the time.
In article <bd4bfe3b5a.harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk>, Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> wrote:
On 23 Oct 2022 as I do recall, Richard Ashbery wrote:
The thing that really confused me is that the effects are
overlayed over the mask instead of the unmasked area - probably
me doing something wrong!
No, it always does that - 'mask' seems to be a misnomer, since it
defines the area where changes are applied rather than where they
are masked out. The manual confirms that this is the intended
effect.
I generally find myself using Invert mask all the time.
It still overlays the effects on the so-called mask.
Ah - that's clearly it.
I had 0.14d.27 and have just tried downloading a fresh copy of "0.41d (5-Feb-2008)" from the website; it still says it was last updated on
the 5th of February and there are no further changes listed in the
change log, but the application now reports itself as 0.41d.38 (I don't
know where you found your .39).
In article <bd4bfe3b5a.harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk>,
Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> wrote:
Ah - that's clearly it.
I had 0.14d.27 and have just tried downloading a fresh copy of "0.41d (5-Feb-2008)" from the website; it still says it was last updated on
the 5th of February and there are no further changes listed in the
change log, but the application now reports itself as 0.41d.38 (I don't know where you found your .39).
My copy reports as 0.41d.45 (5-Feb-2008)
Just downloaded from
http://compo.iconbar.com/variation.htm
and that is the latest!
Edit: if I run Variations and immediately open the info box, it
displays 0.41d.46 - if I close the info box and then reopen it, it
displays 0.41d.45. Curiouser and curiouser.
Edit: if I run Variations and immediately open the info box, it
displays 0.41d.46 - if I close the info box and then reopen it, it
displays 0.41d.45. Curiouser and curiouser.
http://www.bazleyfamily.co.uk/variations041d46.jpg
In article <92c2783f5a.harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk>,
Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> wrote:
[Snip]
Edit: if I run Variations and immediately open the info box, it
displays 0.41d.46 - if I close the info box and then reopen it, it
displays 0.41d.45. Curiouser and curiouser.
Exactly the same behaviour here. Both dated 5-Feb-2008
http://www.bazleyfamily.co.uk/variations041d46.jpg
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 360 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 133:40:06 |
| Calls: | 7,686 |
| Files: | 12,828 |
| Messages: | 5,711,427 |
