Hi Jasper and Hendrik,
thank you for your answers, especially for Jaspers detailed explanation about the blending.
The whole situation is a big mess because
- The feComposite with mode "Over" works at a first glance quite nice. The setting Jasper suggested doesn't work like expected. The problem is, that I have overlapping polygons because if there is a "fold" in the "mathmatical"-surface and there are polygons which are invisible because this part of the surface is behind another, Mathematica still exports them. At these places the feComposite doesn't work like Jasper already pointed out. At those places the background polygons shine through the edges of the foreground polygons.
- Now that I found the "Filter Editor" with your help (since I'm technically an absolutely newbie) I looked around and found some other possible solutions to the problem. One would be to use a Dilation-operator. Problem here: you would need a tiny dilation of size around 0.001 (it depends of course on the data). It seems this doesn't work with such sizes; at least not on my machine [1].
- the number of polygons for a surface can easily grow to about 100000 which makes interactive working impossible; meaning Inkscape crashes when the plot is too complex. The plan would be to use the commandline only because my goal is to convert an svg into a pdf [2] and this doesn't require a running GUI.
Ok, I have a follow-up question:
In my version of Inkscape I cannot store filters directly. When I create a new filter it is stored automatically in/with a concrete svg file. For every new plot I would have to recreate the filter. Did I overlook something? I saw in a (of course Windoze) tutorial a "Save" button in the filter editor. This button does not exist in my version. Any ideas? Because, when I want to apply a filter through the commandline, I assume it must be listet via "inkscape --verb-list".
Cheers Patrick
[1] Ubuntu 9.10, Inkscape 0.47 [2] My main goal is to create "nice and small" pdf versions of my plots. Currently Mathematica creates pdf's which are around 20 MB and need several minutes to be rendered by the Adobe reader. Not acceptable if you want to use them in a LaTeX document.
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 17:03 +0200, Jasper van de Gronde wrote:
On 21-04-11 15:27, Hendrik Boom wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:33:01AM +0200, Jasper van de Gronde wrote:
On 20-04-11 05:57, Patrick Scheibe wrote:
... Following problem: Although no stroke is used for the polygons and the coordinates of neighboring polygons are exactly equal, theres a teeny tiny space visible between them. ...
This is a very well known problem (and not limited to Inkscape btw).
It's specifically mentioned in an OpenGL document I read once. There, the solution is to use the OpenGL functions to pass it an entire grid og triangles as several arrays. One is an array of vertices, and the others refer to vertices by indexes into that array. This just passes the problem on to the OpenGl renderer, which presumably deals with it somehow, given the clue about which vertices (and therefore edges) are to be considered the same.
I don't know if anything coparable is available in SVG, though.
Not built-in. Additive blending should come close though, as long as the shapes being blended don't overlap. If they all have opaque fills you could even handle overlapping shapes pretty well with a more complicated filter, but that's starting to get a bit awkward.
Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-user mailing list Inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-user