Inkscape

> There is a problem with the stroke of the glass: at this small size, it
> seems to be less black than the parasol's stroke...

This is because in the parasol, each stroke is done twice. You have
the black outline of the entire parasol and then you have each segment
with its own outline which overlays the first outline. Even though the
strokes have the same width and are exactly on top of one another, the
fact that each stroke has its own antialiasing fringe and these
fringes add together results in the stroke appearing thicker than it
should at small sizes. This is a common problem for most vector
editors with antialiased display, not only Inkscape; for example Adobe
SVG plugin also shows your file with the parasol outline darker than
the glass if you zoom out far enough.

So, to fix it, you can either remove the double stroke (so that
overlaying segments have only fill and no stroke) or export it at a
larger size and then resize the bitmap.

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, bulia byak wrote:

> Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:20:18 -0300
> From: bulia byak <buliabyak@...>
> Reply-To: inkscape-user@...
> To: inkscape-user@...
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-user] A problem about the PNG export
>
> > There is a problem with the stroke of the glass: at this small size, it
> > seems to be less black than the parasol's stroke...
>
> This is because in the parasol, each stroke is done twice. You have
> the black outline of the entire parasol and then you have each segment
> with its own outline which overlays the first outline. Even though the
> strokes have the same width and are exactly on top of one another, the
> fact that each stroke has its own antialiasing fringe and these
> fringes add together results in the stroke appearing thicker than it
> should at small sizes. This is a common problem for most vector
> editors with antialiased display, not only Inkscape; for example Adobe
> SVG plugin also shows your file with the parasol outline darker than
> the glass if you zoom out far enough.
>
> So, to fix it, you can either remove the double stroke (so that
> overlaying segments have only fill and no stroke) or export it at a
> larger size and then resize the bitmap.

Rather than working around it as suggested, would it be worth allowing
users to disable antialiasing?  (Should I file a Request for Enhancement?)
I imagine the option to disable antialiasing could be quite useful when
exporting to raster formats.

- Alan

> Rather than working around it as suggested, would it be worth allowing
> users to disable antialiasing?  (Should I file a Request for Enhancement?)
> I imagine the option to disable antialiasing could be quite useful when
> exporting to raster formats.

It won't help in this particular case, because this image will be ugly
as hell without AA. But in general, yes, it may be useful. I think we
have an RFE for wireframe and non-AA modes for screen rendering; once
we have them, adding the same capabilities to export will be trivial.

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 13:19, bulia byak wrote:
> It won't help in this particular case, because this image will be ugly
> as hell without AA. But in general, yes, it may be useful. I think we
> have an RFE for wireframe and non-AA modes for screen rendering; once
> we have them, adding the same capabilities to export will be trivial.

FWIW, non-antialiased rendering is also good for high-resolution output
(e.g. for print); if the resolution is sufficiently high, the artifacts
from antialiasing can sometimes make the output look slightly worse.
=20
-mental

>>There is a problem with the stroke of the glass: at this small size, it
>>seems to be less black than the parasol's stroke...

> So, to fix it, you can either remove the double stroke (so that
> overlaying segments have only fill and no stroke) or export it at a
> larger size and then resize the bitmap.


Thank you.

I've just removed the seconds strokes.
But there's an other problem: the superposing adjacents sides of 
"triangles" of the parasol ...

All in all, i've just doing what bulia said; export it at a larger size 
and then, resize the bitmap to the needed size, and now it's ok.

Florent

> I've just removed the seconds strokes.
> But there's an other problem: the superposing adjacents sides of
> "triangles" of the parasol ...

Why can't you move the triangles _under_ the black outline?

bulia byak wrote:
>>I've just removed the seconds strokes.
>>But there's an other problem: the superposing adjacents sides of
>>"triangles" of the parasol ...
> 
> 
> Why can't you move the triangles _under_ the black outline?
> 
The triangles under this black outline has been remove !
You can see this at
http://florentgabriel.ouvaton.org/temporaire/Verre.svg

But, on the small bitmap
http://florentgabriel.ouvaton.org/temporaire/Verre.png
you can see that the outline of the totaly parasol is clean.
But not the adjacents sides of each triangles, certainly because each 
one is superpose on an other one.

Is there a way to "remove" (maybe "hide" is a better word) only one line 
of a shape ?

Florent

> But, on the small bitmap
> http://florentgabriel.ouvaton.org/temporaire/Verre.png
> you can see that the outline of the totaly parasol is clean.
> But not the adjacents sides of each triangles, certainly because each
> one is superpose on an other one.

Why can't you have separate stroke-less triangles and separate
stroke-only black spokes overlaying them?

> Is there a way to "remove" (maybe "hide" is a better word) only one line 
> of a shape ?

Oups, sorry, I've just find the option "Split path between two 
non-endpoint nodes", it's just what I need to remove one of the twice 
lines...
Inkscape is really great !

Now my bitmap is right.

Florent

> 
> Why can't you have separate stroke-less triangles and separate
> stroke-only black spokes overlaying them?
> 
> 
Simply because I don't know an option :-/
Now, it's done. Thank you Bulia.

Florent