Jeff Harmon
2010-07-11 01:06:35 UTC
Hi folks,
It appears that using IM 6.6.3-0_0:
convert +matte source.psd test3.jpg
or
convert source.psd +matte test3.jpg
both result in
test3-10.jpg
test3-9.jpg
test3-8.jpg
test3-7.jpg
test3-6.jpg
test3-5.jpg
test3-4.jpg
test3-3.jpg
test3-2.jpg
test3-1.jpg
test3-0.jpg
with each JPG being a rendering of a layer in the PSD!! -alpha off makes
no difference. Flattened PSDs also result in a perfect JPEG, as expected.
With TIFF, the result is as expected: one JPEG, with the alpha channel(s)
ignored in rendering.
I believe this may be a recent change - layered PSDs in the past were
rendered just as TIFFs were. Does this jibe with anyone else's experience?
I've tested it on three machines, including with a fresh install. I could
also be misunderstanding the syntax of the matte switch?
Thanks for your attention to this!
- J
It appears that using IM 6.6.3-0_0:
convert +matte source.psd test3.jpg
or
convert source.psd +matte test3.jpg
both result in
test3-10.jpg
test3-9.jpg
test3-8.jpg
test3-7.jpg
test3-6.jpg
test3-5.jpg
test3-4.jpg
test3-3.jpg
test3-2.jpg
test3-1.jpg
test3-0.jpg
with each JPG being a rendering of a layer in the PSD!! -alpha off makes
no difference. Flattened PSDs also result in a perfect JPEG, as expected.
With TIFF, the result is as expected: one JPEG, with the alpha channel(s)
ignored in rendering.
I believe this may be a recent change - layered PSDs in the past were
rendered just as TIFFs were. Does this jibe with anyone else's experience?
I've tested it on three machines, including with a fresh install. I could
also be misunderstanding the syntax of the matte switch?
Thanks for your attention to this!
- J