More thoughts on picture to pattern.
F.James Cripwell
the conclusion that providing I might be prepared to stitch it no matter
how big, I can produce a suitable pattern. By big, I measure this in
number of stitches for width and height. The question then is, how big is
too big for me?
I dont think my artistic skills make it possible for me to manipulate
the image in anything like Corel Draw. I took the original picture into MS
Paint, and selected the small area where the details matter most. I then
tried feeding this into Pattern Maker in different sizes, and by this
process decided how big this little part had to be to satisfy me. When I
translate this to the size of the whole flower, I am not prepared to
stitch this particular one.
What I propose to do in the future is something like this.
1. Take a photograph.
2. Bring it into MS Paint, and look at it in detail.
3. Decide which part is critical, and copy just this bit.
4. Import this bit into Pattern Maker in many different sizes.
5. Decide which size is about right, and then calculate how big the
whole picture needs to be. If this is tolerable, proceed further.
Otherwise abandon this picture.
6. Play around with the size of the small bit, to determine precisely
what I think is best.
7. Do some stitching of this bit, and see what the result is like when
there is floss on the canvas.
8. If this looks alright, take the whole picture into Pattern Maker.
9. Sort out the "foreground" from the "background" and eliminate the
latter. I realise at the edge between the foreground and background,
there will need to be a lot of "tweaking".
10. Stitch the whole, sorting out the "Onsies twosies" as I go.
I have not seen this process described in this way. I wonder
if anyone has any comments.
--
Jim Cripwell. In the land of ice and snow, where it's 99 below,
And the polar bears come wandering o'er the plain.
Robert In the shadow of the pole, I will grasp her to my soul,
Service. We'll be happy when the ice worms nest again!!!
Dianne Lewandowski
luck in getting larger pictures down to a reasonable stitching size.
I had made computer art 15 years ago and wanted to chart it. Now, this
is 256-color art wherein only 20 or so colors were used. The finished
size was typical for pics of its time (360x480 or less). I couldn't get
it down to a reasonable size.
So . . . . I'm hoping to learn from these posts of yours!!!
Dianne
Carolyn Potts
to graph to chart. It doesn't seem to be any more involved. LOL
"Dianne Lewandowski" <dia...@heritageshoppe.com> wrote in message
news:3C17F87B...@heritageshoppe.com...
Hardanger5
Ok it appears to me that 50% of your problrm is that your importing to pattern
maker as a bit map. This is the format that paint works in, and there inlies
the problem. Second--and I'm comming in the middle--that that your not
limiting the colors when you import it to a chart/graph. And thirdly are you
limiting the size at import??????
let me address each one:
1. bitmap is by nature a very large file/picture. It also has a lot of spaces
in between the color pixles(or dots). this space is called noise and is the
reason that you'll see a shocking pink block(sitich) in an other wise green
area. If you were to save you picture in to a jpeg or gif--both smaller files
and color dots closre together-- your graph would be smaller and have less
noise to clean up. less space between the dots/pixles==smaller file and less
clean up.
2. Now for limitting colors-- First realise the computer is like a two year old
in that if you tell it to use 436 colors--It's gonna try to use every single
one that it possibly can. The best example I can give is try to import a
black and white line drawing with no limit to the colors. Depending on what it
is--you can end up with 35 to 60 colors of floss--cause the computer will try
and use every shade of black and white possible. where as if you tell it that
it can only use 2 to 4 colors your limiting the number of choices it has.
3. And lastly size. if you limit the size that pattern maker can import the
picture in --it again leaves less room for the noise to be picked up. The
computer is like the 2 year old--give them a 40 by 60 foot area to color
in--and they will fill it up. Now thake that same 2 year old and give them
only 4 colors and a 20 by 30 space--the will fill it up with the most important
colors and image.
And you can also limit the size of the graph by reducing the image size your
importing. Lets use a 8 by 10 scanned image as an example---import the 8 by 10
and your going to have an extremly large graph. but take that same picture
and reduce it's size to 2 by 3 and you'll get a much smaller file to
import--thuus a smaller graph. If you don't know who to do this in paint---you
simply go to image on the paint program's tool bar. Under that you'll find
skech/skew--there you can reduce the size of the picture.
If you have more questions or I didn't explain something clearly--LOL or my
typing was really bad--jut drop me a note and I'll be happy to explain more.
Dors
Dianne Lewandowski
Although the number of bytes between a bitmap image and a 256-color gif
(for instance) might be considerably different, the actual SIZE of the
graphic (such as 110 pixels by 110 pixels) will be the same. Unless, of
course, you scaled it down in your graphics software.
Reducing a 110x110 pixel graphic often does terrible things. Lots of
detail can get lost. A circle, for instance, can lose some of its
"edge".
Some programs, such as the one I now use, can correct for this. But
only up to a point. You also have to deal with "resolution". I use
300ppi most of the time. But 75 to 150 is considered the wisest for web
use and are often used at that res for line art.
I have a feeling that resolution may be as much a culprit as anything.
If I have some minutes tomorrow, I'll try an experiment or two. I
haven't diddled with PatternMaker in a long time, except for this very
easy line art I just did.
By the way: I just figured out how to "get rid" of the imported
graphic. I did it as an overlay, rather than as a graph. After filling
in, etc., I wanted to get rid of the "art", but couldn't. Argh!!!
Discovered by accident just to select it, and drag the upper left handle
all the way to the right. Now it's there if/when I need it - but gone
for printing. (Or, as I ultimately did, selected the finished image and
plopped it into a new graph).
Dianne
Hardanger5
If you want to talk pixles--than your correct--Pattern maker will put the same
number of pixles weather it's a bitmap or a jpeg. How ever it does make a
great deal of difference in what pattern maker picks up.
Pattern maker will pick up the most domiant colors followed by the next and so
on down the line. With the bit map file often containg more bites in sheer
size, pattern maker will pick up quite a bit of that nasty noise and cause the
destortion.
Now add to the fact that Jim is scanning in a picture--a bitmap image will
scann in at a higher pixle size/number than a jpeg. Again because of the sheer
size of the file, this is one the reason that jpegs and gif were invented.
When a picture is scanned in as a bit map it grows in size by roughtly 1 1/2
times. A jpeg or gif on the other hand tend to scan more truer to size.
Pattern maker is a great program--you just have to know it's little quirks.
LOL something else it likes to do is pick up the glare from the light when
scannin a glossy finished picture--so that you catually have a sort of feed
back or lighter blotches in the scan. (this is from personal experaince). I
keep a sheet of "frosted" /nonglair glass to place inbetween the scanner bed
and picture.
Dors
F.James Cripwell
> Hi Jim:
>
> Ok it appears to me that 50% of your problrm is that your importing to pattern
> maker as a bit map. This is the format that paint works in, and there inlies
> the problem. Second--and I'm comming in the middle--that that your not
> limiting the colors when you import it to a chart/graph. And thirdly are you
> limiting the size at import??????
> Dors
Thanks!!!!! This is what I hoped would happen. I must copy it and
read it in detail when I get to try it.