Skip to main content

graphics - Rasterize: Resolution option not working properly



Bug introduced in 7 or earlier and persisting through 12.0
Bug isn't present in version 5.2




Something about Rasterize which doesn't seem to work as intended.


Recipe:




  1. Make some simple vector graphics:


    Test = Graphics[Circle[{0, 0} 1]]



  2. Try to rasterize it having defined ImageSize and ImageResolution:


    TestNew = Rasterize[Test, "Image", ImageResolution -> 300, ImageSize -> 72]

    ImageSize set to 72 means that the resulting image should have exactly 1 inch in size on the screen, since screen resolution is 72 pixels per inch. This is okay.


    ImageResolution set 300 means that this image should have dimensions 300 over 300, since ImageResolution is defined in printer dots per inch and the image has the size of one inch.




  3. However, check image dimensions:


    ImageDimensions[TestNew]


    To discover that it is 72.




Moreover: the result does not depend at all on ImageResolution option. From documentation: "RasterSize and ImageResolution determine the coarseness of rasterization; ImageSize determines the size at which the final image will be displayed." If I vary RasterSize, the coarseness indeed changes. If I vary ImageResolution, the coarseness stays the same.


My system: Ubuntu 14, MMA10.0.1


Questions:




  1. Can anyone reproduce the behaviour? (done; yes)





  2. If it's not a bug, what is the reason? (mostly done: technical reason wonderfully explained by Alexey Popkov; this will be updated after the answer from WRI support is available)




  3. Could someone try this on older MMA versions? (done: See Alexey's comment to his answer: ImageResoltution is overriden by ImageSize in V7, but not in V5)




Edit: The result I would want to obtain in the above example can be obtained by calling:


TestNew = Rasterize[Test, "Image", RasterSize -> 300, ImageSize -> 72]


Or, for general image sizes:


Rasterize[Test, "Image", ImageResolution -> , ImageSize -> ()*(72/2.54)]

should give the same result as:


Rasterize[Test, "Image", RasterSize -> (/2.54)*(), ImageSize -> ()*(72/2.54)]

In other words, ImageResolution and RasterSize seem to serve the same purpose, but the former one doesn't seem to work as it should.


Status update: According to the feedback from WRI: The question has been acknowledged as an issue. However it is not decided yet, how exactly it is to be resolved.



Answer




With a bit of spelunking I extracted the following from


g = Graphics[{Circle[], FontSize -> 20, Text["x^2+y^2<1", {0, 0}]}, ImageSize -> 72];
Trace[Rasterize[g, ImageSize -> 72, ImageResolution -> 100]]

in v.10.0.1.




An excerpt from the Trace output


1) At first, the value of RasterSize is extracted from the Rasterize command using OptionValue:


System`ConvertersDump`rs$ = 
OptionValue[Rasterize, {ImageSize -> 72, ImageResolution -> 100}, RasterSize]



Automatic

2) In our case RasterSize is Automatic (the default value) and hence on the following line the value of ImageSize option (which has dimensionality of printer's points, i.e. the base unit is inch) is incorrectly taken as RasterSize (which has dimensionality of pixels) without taking into consideration ImageResolution:


If[System`ConvertersDump`rs$ === Automatic, 
System`ConvertersDump`rs$ =
OptionValue[Rasterize, {ImageSize -> 72, ImageResolution -> 100},
ImageSize]]



72

3) Now the new value for RasterSize is converted into the form {width, heigh}:


If[! ListQ[System`ConvertersDump`rs$] || Length[System`ConvertersDump`rs$] != 2, 
System`ConvertersDump`rs$ = {System`ConvertersDump`rs$, Automatic}]


{72, Automatic}


4) At the next step final image resolution is calculated from the new RasterSize (note that the original ImageResolution is present but ignored!):


{System`ConvertersDump`w$, System`ConvertersDump`h$} = System`ConvertersDump`rs$;

System`ConvertersDump`ir$ =
System`ConvertersDump`GetIR[
Graphics[{Circle[{0, 0}], FontSize -> 20, Text["x^2+y^2<1", {0, 0}]}, ImageSize -> 72],
{System`ConvertersDump`w$, System`ConvertersDump`h$},
ImageSize -> 72, ImageResolution -> 100]



72

5) And finally the packet is constructed using the obtained value for ImageResolution:


System`ConvertersDump`rdpdata$ = 
System`ConvertersDump`ToRasterDataPacket[
Graphics[{Circle[{0, 0}], FontSize -> 20, Text["x^2+y^2<1", {0, 0}]}, ImageSize -> 72],
{"Rasterize", "BoundingBox"},
ImageResolution -> System`ConvertersDump`ir$, Background -> System`ConvertersDump`bg$,
ColorSpace -> System`ConvertersDump`cs$,
Sequence @@

FilterRules[{ImageSize -> 72, ImageResolution -> 100},
Except[{ImageResolution, Background, ColorSpace}]]]



What happens when ImageSize is not specified


When ImageSize is not specified, everything is the same up to the step 4):


System`ConvertersDump`ir$ = 
System`ConvertersDump`GetIR[
Graphics[{Circle[{0, 0}], FontSize -> 20, Text["x^2+y^2<1", {0, 0}]}, ImageSize -> 72],
{System`ConvertersDump`w$, System`ConvertersDump`h$},

ImageResolution -> 100]


100

We see that when the new value of RasterSize is {Automatic, Automatic} the original value of ImageResolution is taken as the final value for image resolution at this step.




Conclusion


From the above it is clear that the key option which currently determines the image resolution in Rasterize is not ImageResolution but RasterSize.


The mechanism of the inconsistent behavior described in the question is as follows: when non-Automatic ImageSize is specified without RasterSize it is taken as ImageResolution. This contradicts to the documented meaning of these options: ImageSize specifies the size of the image in printer's points where inch is the base unit while ImageResolution has dimensionality of dots per inch.



At the same time the combination RasterSize + ImageSize works as expected in accord with the Documentation. So the workaround is to use RasterSize and do not rely on ImageResolution.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...