I've posted this on a Photoshop board, but no answers so far, so I decided to post it here also.
-----
I want to make an Action which pastes my URL into a photo, then moves the text to the lower left bottom of the image, and then saves the image as a JPG.
The problem is that when I use a batch to run the action, the text is placed in a different place depending on the dimensions of the original picture! (For example if some are portrait-oriented and some are landscape-oriented.)
Until now I've solved it by resizing all images to the same height, but that should really not be necessary. How do I make an Action which can do this in a Batch?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf adding the watermark is the only edit you need to do, Photoshop is overkill and too manual of a tool for the job.
ReplyDeleteI would just use the watermark option on the Aperture export presets. (I'm sure Lightroom has something similar, if that's what you use.)
If Lightroom is an option then using LR2/Mogrify plugin would let you add the url as text. It is also useful for other embellishments.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.photographers-toolbox.com/products/lr2mogrify.php
Maybe I oughta look into those things.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure if I was starting now, Aperture or Lightroom would be perfect for me. And I actually paid for Aperture. But I'm soooo comfortably settled in my routines with Photoshop and GraphicConverter, both of which I've been using for fifteen years.
Had this same problem myself & used this solution
ReplyDeletehttp://www.retouchpro.com/forums/photo-compositing/18572-text-terms-percentage-picture-height-insert.html
It involves creating the watermark as a separate file & using the place command to add it to the batch of images. Since place is done relative to the borders of the original image, it is possible to achieve what you want.
Right on, Mike! The place command is very useful for other functions too, in PS.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much.
ReplyDeleteYes, with this one I can at least always get it in the lower bottom of the image, which is good enough. That's if I make the Source image portrait format. If it's square, the text ends up sitting somewhere up along the left side of portrait-format pictures. I haven't figured out how to get it to the lower-left *corner*, but that's not important.
I'm used to finding creative solutions "within the frame" (pun intended!) with image editors, because I'm not too expert with the subtleties and kinks of their capricious instructions and sometimes glitchy workings. I'm not too patient either, with mechanized stubborn stupidity. :-p
ReplyDeleteFor example, my own editor sometimes "fatal errors" when cropping too closely around the bottom or right border, AND often erases its last saved image when this hapens. ):-P
What I would do to work around this problem you mention, is make the watermark as an image file with transparent background, flip it vertically, then automate the following:
- flip the big photo vertically (this doesn't change the image at pixel level)
- add/paste the watermark on the TOP LEFT corner, which is "constant" because to the software it's always the beginning of the image file
- flip the result back and save.
In theory, that's the most reliable and simple way to automate it in a standard, imperfectly designed image editor
With computers, you've got to know how they "think". Highly complex, but ultimately very stupid machines. Completely mechanical processes. Automatons with electrical Spacely™ cogs. Glitches always come from the same type of mechanisms and software programming errors.
For instance, I bet the bug in the problem I've met -described above- comes from the programmer forgetting that the first line/column of pixels is ranked "zero" and not 1, so he allowed the cropping frame to extend to the pixel number of the images's height/width, effectively trying to process an image one line/column too wide. Just by one unit, but that's all it takes!!! Then it all bugs by exceeding the allocated table in memory.
The file deletion is probably a faulty attempt at saving the work in progress in extremis...
All I really know about programming is self-taught Basic and HTML. But I've grasped the logical principles, the fundamental set of rules. Like mathematics, the bases are simple and clear. Computers are all about mechanized logic. If you teach them wrong, or just design them slightly improperly, they will get stumped, and then they'll just stand there, drooling "d'uuuh... ah dunno!". [The displaying of an error message in itself was already a huge evolution!] Their PRACTICAL intelligence level: slightly below that of a protozoa. Life had its priorities set straighter...
The Windows series is so notoriously crappy, because "what is well conceived gets expressed clearly", as Descartes (I think) said. The Microsoft programmers aren't thorough and intelligent enough. They make messy code, and go "bah, I'm sure this'll do".
The problem is, they're imposed to the world by the (in)famous monopole as "top professionals", while they probably tidy their programming the same way they probably tidy their bachelors' bedrooms. They're only top in position, NOT in competence. :-(
Some 20 years ago, I designed many a Basic program, often big ones. (For instance, one that did everything to play chess... except analyze moves! :-) I'm quite familiar with what makes software do "not what I wanted". It's nearly always a flaw in the design, an overlooked human error. Occasionally, a flaw in the HARDWARE's design.
Granted, today's softwares have become monstrously large and complex. But working in an orderly fashion would make things a lot more reliable. AND leave a healthier inheritage to the later sequels. It's been established by official studies: most programmers are horribly messy. They miss countless errors because they couldn't find their location if their lives depended on it.
Excuse me now, I've got to restart my system after installing a couple dozen Windows security updates... :-P
No. No-no-no, you stupid server! It's not "culpat", it's spelled CULPRIT.
See what I meant?
"- add/paste the watermark on the TOP LEFT corner, which is "constant" because to the software it's always the beginning of the image file"
ReplyDeleteYes, you'd think so. Intelligent solution, and one I've already tried.
But it does not work. It seems that what PS does it always paste an item in the middle of the picture, and then when I move it, measure that movement from where it was, not according to any edge or corner of the picture.
... Actually I suspect it's worse, I think it pastes it in the middle of the *screen*, which has no constant in relation to the image. I think this because if I do the process with full-screen view, the pasting (and move-to) gets done in a different place than if I use regular window view...
Well, artificial intelligence allied with natural stupidity of a designer can yield some pretty extraordinary results.
ReplyDeleteMaybe you should forget about using Photoshop sensibly and just go into dadaist image creation? For instance, couple Photoshop with your spam filter...
......
Yeah, you're right : the world doesn't deserve such cruelty. ;-P
"Intelligent solution, and one I've already tried."
Silly me for forgetting who I was talking to. :-)
You're not at the genius level of this person, though!
I think you can spot "them" from their stiff pinky. ;-p