When I inspected them closer, I discovered they had a single 98% opaque pixel, or a border with a slight fade, or just one invisible corner pixel. However, while doing this work, I encountered several files that looked normal but still got the 'has transparency' label. No Krita or PSD or anything yet-I'm not sure if our various rendering hacks are even able to pass along accurate alpha info.Īs always, I'm interested in seeing any unusual files that fail the test. I'm also keeping it simple to start with, so we are scanning all images except jpegs and animated gifs. There are a bunch of files out there with an alpha channel that is all 100% opaque, so my 'has transparency' check actually looks for impactful transparency information in the image. Note that this is not a 'this file is RGBA' test. You can review how much it has still to do under database->file maintenance->manage scheduled jobs. It will take some time for the full results to populate. Like 'has exif' and others before it, 'has transparency' will be correct for all new files instantly, but figuring it out for your existing files will take a bit of background maintenance work. You can now search it under the new 'system:file properties' entry, selecting 'system:has/no transparency' (or you can just type it). This might mean a file with fully transparent pixels, or it might just be an area that is semi-transparent. So, the database can now remember if a file has transparency. There's a bunch of small fixes and improvements, and the addition of 'system:has transparency' search.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |