Extend WatermarkFilter with multiple option #1281
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Timothy Zemp <[email protected]>
|
As far as i understand, the watermark is paved in the picture over its entire area. Perhaps the option should have been named "pave"? Problem #1007 talks about adding several different watermarks to one picture with the ability to choose the location of the watermarks, and not about pave the entire picture with one watermark. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Signed-off-by: Timothy Zemp [email protected]
Extends the watermark functionally to allow multiple watermarks of the same type. It tries to paste the watermark onto the image as often as possible.
I'm not sure if "position" is the right way to address this problem, but i can be solved within few lines of code. It can also uses the "size" attribute -> 0.25% -> 4 watermarks per width.
Maybe some validation is required to prevent sizes > 1.0, as this is not validated yet.
Feedback appreciated :-)