Bug#777599: ITP: stiff -- convert scientific FITS images to the more popular TIFF format
Hi Guus,
thanks for your response.
On 11.02.2015 10:37, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 03:09:58PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> Description : convert scientific FITS images to the more popular TIFF format
>
> I would remove "more popular", it doesn't provide any useful
> information and might not even be true.
I changed this in the control file.
>> STIFF is a program that converts scientific FITS images to the more popular
>> TIFF format for illustration purposes.
>
> Same here. Also, there are many programs that can already convert FITS
> to TIFF, like ImageMagick or GIMP. So please put something in the long
> description about the features stiff provides that are not in other
> programs (like support for pyramidal TIFF files and precise control over
> color rendition).
The control file lists a number of features:
* Accurate reproduction of the original surface brightnesses and colours
* Automatic or manual contrast and brightness adjustments
* Automatic sky background intensity and colour balance
* Adjustable colour saturation
* Colour-friendly gamma correction capabilities
* One or three input channels: gray-scale or true colour output
* Output with 8 or 16 bits per component
* Pixel rebinning and x/y flip options
* Support for arbitrarily large input and output images on standard
hardware (BigTIFF support)
* Support for tiled, multiresolution pyramids
* Support for lossless and lossy compression methods
* Multi-threaded code with load-balancing to take advantage of multiple
cores and processors.
* XML VOTable-compliant output of meta-data.
However, the main reason to put it to Debian is just that astronomers
use it (and not ImageMagic or GIMP).
> I think it would be nice if you could package the manual as well, and
> change the manpage to point to the local manual.
Unfortunately, the manual comes without source. And for another package
(sextractor), there was already a bug (https://bugs.debian.org/699275)
which finally could only resolved by removing the manual. So, I can only
include the manual if we get the source of it with a reasonable license.
Reply to: