So I have a programming project that I have to do for my school. What I have to do is setup a 2 player dice game. I could have gone the easy way and just display the number of the 2 die, but I was thinking of using images that I made in photoshop instead. However, the problem is that I do not know how to change images in an efficient way.
My first option is using the visibility tag on several images laid on top of eachother and change it accordingly as such
image1.visible = false
image2.visible = true
However, I do not think that is very efficient. Images also do not support changing the image with code from my research.
Secondly, I could use a PictureBox instead, which do support changing the image as the program is running. However, it does not support transparency, and the die images are transparent. Plus it gives me the invalid image file error, I guess due to the transparency in the gif files.
There is also the cheap workaround of me making the background of the images the same as the form background.
So is there a more efficient way I am missing out? I know that the cheap workaround would be the best option for this case, but I would like to have this knowledge for future use like semi-transparent pixels that blend in and such.
And before you ask, no, I cannot use another programming language as visual basic 6 is what my school teaches. Thankfully they are changing it soon, but I am stuck with this for now.
Turns out you CAN change the pictures of Images, while keeping transparency and stretch. I am going to properly show it:
Image1.Picture = LoadPicture("YOURPATHHERE.gif")
This is what I get for believing what I've seen on some forum.
Also, the error of invalid image file was due to the images being corrupted for some reason.
I have a website that incorporates a logo in to the header. This logo has a background that is the same colour as the background of the header, yet in Firefox the colour is different.
I can find various articles alluding that the 'colour profile' being the culprit, but I cannot find out how to fix this issue.
Quite why anyone would think that changing the colour of an image is the way forward I don't know, but it looks very poor, so I'd be grateful for some suggestions on how to fix this.
To create the original image I used GIMP, and it has been exported as a PNG.
Here is a section of the header so that you can visually see what I mean -
Since you do not provide the original image, I have to make an educated guess:
Your image most likely has a (broken, incorrect) color profile embedded. Fix or remove the color profile and you should be good. See the documentation of your favorite tool on how to do that.
You should use some tool like tweakpng to check if the PNG has a color profile, and remove it.
Okay the Title can be misleading.
But it´s like this.
I have made an application that constantly sends Images from Client A to Client B.
When Client B receives the image, it will replace the last image.
I currently use Picturebox or Panel, so pretty much:
panel1.BackgroundImage = Image.FromStream((MemoryStream)NetSerializer.Serializer.Deserialize(tt1.GetStream()));
It looks weird though, but as you can se, it will just change the image, when it´s there.
This all goes well up to about 800x600, then it will bottleneck.
I don´t know the update frequency, but i am guessing it´s around 60fps, as i am taking screenshots from my desktop or particular windows.
The bandwidth is not the problem here as long as i don´t use .bmp at 800x600+ of course.
Anyway, my question is, what can i use to replace this way of showing images?
I am guessing something with Directx/OpenGL or something?
Sadly i haven´t found a way to even display an image with that, though then again, i have a hard time understanding it.
I am open for suggestions and examples.
EDIT:
I am thinking, maybe to use WPF to just show the image.
But i don´t know if i can change the background image from a winform, so if it´s possible then i am all ear.
Thanks
Very large images will not render in Google Chrome (although the scrollbars will still behave as if the image is present). The same images will often render just fine in other browsers.
Here are two sample images. If you're using Google Chrome, you won't see the long red bar:
Short Blue
http://i.stack.imgur.com/ApGfg.png
Long Red
http://i.stack.imgur.com/J2eRf.png
As you can see, the browser thinks the longer image is there, but it simply doesn't render. The image format doesn't seem to matter either: I've tried both PNGs and JPEGs. I've also tested this on two different machines running different operating systems (Windows and OSX). This is obviously a bug, but can anyone think of a workaround that would force Chrome to render large images?
Not that anyone cares or is even looking at this post, but I did find an odd workaround. The problem seems to be with the way Chrome handles zooming. If you set the zoom property to 98.6% and lower or 102.6% and higher, the image will render (setting the zoom property to any value between 98.6% and 102.6% will cause the rendering to fail). Note that the zoom property is not officially defined in CSS, so some browsers may ignore it (which is a good thing in this case since this is a browser-specific hack). As long as you don't mind the image being resized slightly, I suppose this may be the best fix.
In short, the following code produces the desired result, as shown here:
<img style="zoom:98.6%" src="http://i.stack.imgur.com/J2eRf.png">
Update:
Actually, this is a good opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. As screens move to higher resolutions (e.g. the Apple Retina display), web developers will want to start serving up images that are twice as large and then scaling them down by 50%, as suggested here. So, instead of using the zoom property as suggested above, you could simply double the size of the image and render it at half the size:
<img style="width:50%;height:50%;" src="http://i.stack.imgur.com/J2eRf.png">
Not only will this solve your rendering problem in Chrome, but it will make the image look nice and crisp on the next generation of high-resolution displays.
What are some effective strategies for preventing the use of my proprietary images?
I'm talking about saving them, direct linking to them etc...
Presently I have a watermark on the image, but I'd rather not.
.NET platform preferred, but if there's a strategy that's on another platform that integrates with my existing application that'd be a bonus.
It's not possible to make it "impossible" to download. When a user visits your site you're sending them the pictures. The user will have a copy of that image in the browsers cache and he'd be able to access it even after he leaves the site ( depending on the browser, of course ). Your only real option is to watermark them :O
You could embed each image inside of a flash application, then the browser wouldn't know how to 'save' the image and wouldn't store the raw jpg in the cache folder either. They could still just press the print screen key to get a copy of the image, but it would probably be enough to stop most visitors.
Response.WriteBinary(), embedded flash, JavaScript hacks, hidden divs.
Over the years I have seen and tried every possible way to secure an image and I have come to one conclusion: If it can be seen online; it can be taken, my friend.
So, what you really should consider what the final goal of this action would really be. Prevent piracy? If a gross and oversized watermark is not your style, you can always embed hidden data (Apress had an article that looked promising on digital steganography) in images to identify them as your own later. You might only offer reduced or lower quality images.
Flickr takes the approach of placing a transparent gif layer on top of the image so if you are not logged in and right click you get their ever awesome spaceball.gif. But nothing can prevent a screenshot other than, well, just not offering the picture.
If the music industry could get you to listen to all of your music without copying or owning files they would. If television could broadcast and be certain nobody could store a copy of the cast, they probably would as well. It's the unfortunate part of sharing media with the public. The really good question here is how you can protect your material WITHOUT getting in the way of respectable users from consuming your images. Put on too much protection and nobody will go to your site/use your software (Personally if you try to disable my mouse I'll go from good user to bad nearly instantly).
using JavaScript to override the click event is the most common I have seen...
see: http://pubs.logicalexpressions.com/pub0009/LPMArticle.asp?ID=41
I figure I might as well put in my two cents.
None of the above methods will work with perhaps the exception of a watermark.
Wherever I go, I can hit print screen on my computer and paste into a graphics editor, and with a little cropping, I have your image.
The only way to overcome the watermark issue would be to use photoshop tools to remove the watermark. At this point, i think most people would just give up and pay you for your content or at a minimum go rip off somebody else.
Short answer: you can't. Whatever you display to a user is going to be available to them. You can watermark it, blur it, or offer a low-res version of it, but the bottom line is that whatever images are displayed in the user's browser are going to be available to them in some way.
It's just not possible. There is always the PrintScreen button.
Whatever is displayed, can be captured.
I would watermark them, and reduce the resolution, of the actual files, instead of doing it through an application on the user's end.
unfortunately you can always screen grab the browser and crop the image out, not perfect but it circumvents almost every solution posted here :(
Another approach I've seen that's still entirely vulnerable to screen grabs but does make right-click and cache searching sufficiently annoying is to break the image up into many little images and display them on your page tiled together to appear as though they were a single image. But as everyone has said, if they can see it, they can grab it.
Realistically you can't, unless you don't want them to see it in the first place. You could use some javascript to catch the right mouse button click, but that's really about it.
Another thought, you could possibly embed it in flash, but again, they could just take a screenshot.
Sorry. That's impossible. All you can do is make it inconvenient a la flickr.
It's just not possible. There is always the PrintScreen button.
I remember testing ImageFreeze years ago. It used a Java applet to fetch and display images. The image data and connection was encrypted and the unencrypted image wasn't stored in a temp folder or even in Java's cache.
Also, the applet constantly cleared the windows clipbrd so Print Screen didn't work.
It worked pretty good, but it had some faults.
Besides requiring Java, the JS that embedded the applet (and maybe the applet itself) was setup to not load properly in any browser that didn't give access to the windows clipbrd. This meant that it only worked in IE and only on windows.
Also, the interval the applet used to clear the clipbrd could be beaten with a really fast Print Screen and ctrl+v into Gimp. Printing the screen in other ways would work too.
Finally, Jad could decompile the applet and all/most of its files. So, if you really wanted the pics, you could poke around in the source to figure out how they did it.
In short, you can go out of your way to stop a lot of people, but usability goes down the drain and there will always be a way to get the image if the visitor can see it.
Anything you send to the client is, like, on the client. Not much you can do about it besides making somewhere between "sorta hard" and "quite hard" to save the image.
I must say in the begining that it is almost impossible to stop the
images or text being copied, but making it difficult will prevent most
of the users to steal content.. In this article I will give a easier
but effective way of protecting images with html/css. We will take a
very simple way for this… Firstly in a div we will place the image
with a given height and width. (Say 200 X 200)
Now we can place another transparent image with same height and
width and give it a margine of -200. So that it will overlap the
actual image. And when the user will try to copy this, they will end
up with the transparent gif only…
<div style=”float: left;”>
<img src=”your-image.jpg” style=”width: 200px;height: 200px;”/>
<img src=”the-dummy-image.png” style=”border: 0px solid #000; width: 200px; height: 250px; margin-left: -200px; ” />
</div>