Image Processing (batch)

[Ivan Illarionov]

On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 07:10:56 +0000, Tim Roberts wrote:

> Thomas Guettler <hv at tbz-pariv.de> wrote:
>>
>>I tried PIL for image batch processing. But somehow I don't like it
>>  - Font-Selection: You need to give the name of the font file. -
>>  Drawing on an image needs a different object that pasting and saving.
>>  - The handbook is from Dec. 2006.

I don't want to dissapoint you but PIL font handling sucks terribly.

> I have repeatedly seen the attitude in your last point, and I simply do
> not understand it.  What on Earth is wrong with having a product that
> actually becomes stable?
> 
> We all complain about Microsoft's feature bloat, rolling out unnecessary
> new releases of their products year after year with features that no one
> really needs.  But when an open source product FAILS to produce a new
> release every six weeks, we start seeing posts questioning whether the
> product is still viable or has become abandonware.

I think if you really TRY to create your own project you'll understand 
what's going on here.

>From near 10 open source projects that I've started only 1 is living 
today.

> Once a product does the job it was designed to do, IT'S DONE.

Because there's no such thing as "do the job you where designed to do"
Example: designed for image manipulation. No matter how many features 
you've already implemented there's always something more to do.

> Personally, I think PIL is a great solution for batch processing, but
> the beauty of the open source world is that the ARE alternatives.

Yes, it's open source, and everybody will win if you'll extend PIL to do 
what you want.

Really, I do have some working snippets of code that do handle fonts 
nicely with PIL images, read and parse OpenType tables, but I can't 
publish it because it's optimized for my private needs like only two 
languages: Russian and English.

I had to rewrite PIL's FreeType layer from scratch to do what I want.

You can do the same.

Ivan