Re: IDL graphics w/ no display [message #41486 is a reply to message #41415] |
Wed, 27 October 2004 11:48   |
JD Smith
Messages: 850 Registered: December 1999
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:32:13 -0400, Ken Mankoff wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Ben Tupper wrote:
>
>> Ken Mankoff wrote:
>>
>> (1) About OG without a display device.
>>
>> I think you canuse the IDLgrBuffer as the destination drawing device. The
>> following works without X11 (MacOSX).
>
> Yeah that code works. But the only reason I am considering OG is
> because of anti-aliasing. But it turns out only IDLgrText supports
> anti-aliasing! I had hoped all lines would be aliased, not just the
> text...
>
>> (2) I think that the iMap might be disguising how easy it can be
>> to transform map polygons into the OG realm. I recall a thread on
>> this newsgroup where somebody tessalated the Polygons for Alaska
>> and then threw them into an object graphics destination. (I think
>> it was Karl - but I haven't found that thread.) With the advent
>> of the MAP_PROJ_***** routines, it sure seems like RSI has freed
>> mapping from the DG world. So, somewhere in iMap, the CIA map
>> data (or the Shape file data) that comes with IDL is unpacked and
>> then formed into OG polygons. That said, I have no experience
>> with OG mapping although I started down that path once in an idle
>> moment.
>
> It might be this:
> http://tinyurl.com/445dg
>
> My new question is this: If I am producing static images written to
> disk, and making heavy use of the ma_set, map_grid, etc code, and
> _not_ doing interactive stuff, does it make sense to use OG or DG?
>
> The only advantage to OG is pretty text, not even pretty lines.
Personally I would target the postscript device in direct graphics,
and then use ImageMagick's "convert" to convert to PNG, ala:
convert -antialias -density 150x150 map.eps map.png
Maybe more overhead than you want to assume.
JD
|
|
|