| Summary: | BQM Watermark tool : Shadow and outline | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] digikam | Reporter: | Stefano <rs4000> |
| Component: | Plugin-Bqm-WaterMark | Assignee: | Digikam Developers <digikam-bugs-null> |
| Status: | REPORTED --- | ||
| Severity: | wishlist | CC: | caulier.gilles, mbc, qrczakoff |
| Priority: | NOR | Keywords: | junior-jobs |
| Version: | 1.4.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Debian unstable | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
|
Description
Stefano
2010-10-12 09:17:58 UTC
There are many, many graphical features that I could imagine being useful when watermarking an image. So many that I do not think it is feasible to implement them in specialized versions in the watermarking tool. I suggest that you create an image with the outlines, shadows, alpha/transparencies, colors, fonts, symbols, graphics, etc. that you need and use the image watermark feature instead of the text watermark. That way you will have all the features of your chosen graphics tool at your disposal. I use Inkscape and the GIMP, for example. Uhm, I'm not sure I can see your point. I know that watermarking can use complex things, and I know how to create ad-hoc watermarks, but watermarking with variable simple strings (including for example the name of an event and year) is exactly what I want and exactly what this tool does well. An outline with contrasting color would just complete it, keeping it simple. IIRC (may be wrong though) outlining/shadowing is directly supported by Qt API... (shadowing actually is superflous). My point is that different people need different simple things. Trying to put all of them in the watermark tool is complex. The background feature that the watermark tool already has already solves the visibility issue. The only problem is that it looks ugly. Outlining is another way to solve the same problem, shadowing is yet another way, but they are not the only ways. Myself, I would like the shadow blurred. Other people probably want other things. We will end up having implemented a whole, full-featured graphics editor embedded in the watermarking tool. I suppose you are going to say, "No, I don't want all those other features, I just want MY feature!", right? :-) I am not trying to block the development of an outline/shadow feature. It sounds very useful. I am just trying to advocate a certain way of thinking about which features belong within a given scope and which do not necessarily belong there. No wait, you overestimate my point. I just want the watermark to be usable AS IS, without any further implementation. I don't want (or better, I'd want, but it's out of scope) a full featured watermarking tool, or other means, I just want this to be usable under mixed background color pictures. It just doesn't fit just like it is now. Outline is a font-related feature, not even a watermark related one. Btw, we understood each other ;) *** Bug 312184 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |