Page 1 of 1

standard_deviation vs standard-deviation IM 6.8.7.4 Q16

Posted: 2013-11-07T13:33:27-07:00
by fmw42
I was doing some testing between fx and string formats to see about consistent notation. The documentation says that for fx one needs maxima, minima and standard_deviation. And for string formats it says max, min and standard-deviation. It would appear that maxima and minima actually also work string formats. It would be nice if the string formats would also accept standard_deviation. I am willing to edit the docs if this can be done.

FX:

convert rose: -format "%[fx:maxima]\n" info:
1

convert rose: -format "%[fx:minima]\n" info:
0.0862745

convert rose: -format "%[fx:standard_deviation]\n" info:
0.233019


String Formats:

convert rose: -format "%[max]\n" info:
65535

convert rose: -format "%[maxima]\n" info:
65535

convert rose: -format "%[min]\n" info:
5654

convert rose: -format "%[minima]\n" info:
5654

convert rose: -format "%[standard-deviation]\n" info:
15270.9

convert rose: -format "%[standard_deviation]\n" info:
convert: unknown image property "%[standard_deviation]" @ warning/property.c/InterpretImageProperties/3367.

Re: standard_deviation vs standard-deviation

Posted: 2013-11-07T14:21:19-07:00
by dlemstra
I just added standard_deviation, the next release of ImageMagick will include this. Please update the documentation.

Re: standard_deviation vs standard-deviation IM 6.8.7.4 Q16

Posted: 2013-11-07T15:44:14-07:00
by fmw42
Both IM 6 and IM 7 docs are now updated. Should be available publicly by tomorrow at the latest.