I am adding some images to Android's system gallery with CameraRoll.addBitmapData. This all works just fine, however the quality of the added images is... how to put it... disastrous! Absolutely unusable. Considering the method doesn't accept any parameters, I am not quite sure what can be done about it. Is there any other way how to achieve this or this case is lost? Thanks!
https://github.com/abhisek-mishra/ScreenShot
Use the native extension above. If you need hel to use it, just ask for it. I´ll see what i can do for u if is the case.
Related
![enter image description here][1]please I need some help, this should apparently be something very simple and basic to do, but maybe I'm missing something.
I'm quite newbie to Unity3d, I had no much problem with creating a somewhat flashy 2.D scene (I mean 2D with different layers in Z level), scripts, etc. But I'm having trouble to create a "UI Slider" object: when I create it, it just shows nothing on screen. How can I make it visible? I just need to create a very simple, plain slider whose value can be controlled at runtime by means of a script.
thanks.
Well.. since you give nothing to go on, I suggest that you take a look at a tutorial for the UI:
https://unity3d.com/learn/tutorials/modules/beginner/live-training-archive/using-the-ui-tools
If you have troubles after this tutorial, come back with an example of your problem to make people more willing to sacrifice their time in helping you.
Hope this is somewhat useful
Take a look at the Unity3D docs here.
http://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/script-Slider.html
It should have what you are looking for.
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
When I use the following,
imshow(imread('image1.jpg'));
imshow(imread('image2.jpg'));
imshow(imread('image3.jpg'));
imshow(imread('image4.jpg'));
imshow(imread('image5.jpg'));
imshow(imread('image6.jpg'));
I got only image named image6.jpg in the output figure.
There is also an option figure,imshow(...); to view all the images each in new window.
But writing figure in each line where I need to view the image is a repeated and tedious process. Is there any other solution to get the same output as with figure,imshow(..);
without using figure function.
I mainly put on this question because while programming a lot somewhere we forget to use the figure function and so the image that we need to view wont be visible. It would have been overwritten by other image. So provide me some solution.
I ask this only for simplicity in writing the code. So if there is any solution, please mention.
Thanks in advance.
I'm not sure, but I don't think that there's a workaround to that. MATLAB basically changes the current figure handle to that of a new image when you use imshow. One thing you can do however is to make a copy of imshow in your local directory and edit it accordingly to make your own UDF.
What I would recommend however (so as to preserve functionality across systems) is that you open your code is an editor and replace all imshows with figure, imshow. This should be easy enough and it'll be easy to revert back as well.
I've been looking around to see if there exists a good way to prevent viewers from using their right click options to download images that I upload to my website.
I know that people can look at the image url in the page source, and was wondering if you suggest a way to prevent them being taken, by disabling the save image option.
This is an unsolvable problem.
As long as you actually want people to see the images, you cannot prevent them from saving them via a number of methods (e.g. screenshots). All measures you might think of will just annoy your users, without actually preventing them from doing what they want anyway. Also consider that the people watching those images will have some interest in them (otherwise they would not watch them in the first place), so there we already have a motive for them to keep a copy.
The only way to reliably prevent people from saving the images is to never let them copy them onto their computers in the first place (and remember: showing something on another computer always entails making a copy).
One solution could be to invite people into a place where they can view the image on a screen which you control, and not let them take any pictures. Think of modern cinemas where security people with night sights watch the spectators and pull out those who might have been handling any camera like device.
If you want to make it even more difficult, do not use an IMG tag. Instead, define the image using CSS with the property 'background-image'. To make it even more tricky, define that property at runtime using JavaScript that was placed on the page using base64 encoding.
You can try this...
onload=function(){
document.oncontextmenu=function(){return false;}
}
This will disallow the operation of the context (right mouse button click) menu...
If a user knows what they're doing they can get around this, though.
I suggest not doing this. It's annoying and you're not actually protecting yourself.
If you must, jQuery makes it pretty easy to disable the right click menu:
$(document).ready(function(){
$('img').bind("contextmenu",function(){
return false;
});
});
Just make your images so ugly no one would want to take them.
Seriously, what are you worried about?
If you use the Microsoft Ajax Seadragon Deep Zoom viewer for you images then you can present your images as lots of overlapping tiles - a real pain to stick back together, difficulty depends on images size, but for hi-resolution images it makes 'printscreen' the only option for those wanting to steal stuff.
Incidentally the contextmenu thing works on divs better than images (things bubble) and you don't have to offend people by doing no click on the whole document.
To do it by class, e.g. with Prototype:
$$('.your-image-container-class').each(function(s) {s.oncontextmenu=function(){return false;}});
I know the idea is to make the text somehow hard to read for the users but still they complain and I've seen how the control used here in stackoverflow doesn't have the dark circles contrasting with the text in recaptcha.
How can I replicate this?
Thanks.
You can't.
If you want more control over how the CAPTCHAs are generated, you may want to take a look at different library.