fix: ensure filter is also an acceptable size #948
Conversation
|
Sorry for the lack of response, I'll try to take a closer look soon. |
|
Thanks! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry again about the delay. It's a bit hard for me to judge whether it's completely correct as I'm not familiar with that part of the code, but given that Chrome can also render the SVG I believe it should be fine to merge. Just two small comments.
| let s_w = shrunk.width() as f32 / tf_rect.to_int_rect().width() as f32; | ||
| let s_h = shrunk.height() as f32 / tf_rect.to_int_rect().height() as f32; | ||
| transform.pre_scale(s_w, s_h) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't it also happen that the shrunken bbox has a different x/y starting point? In which case we probably also have to apply a translational transform? Or am I missing something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe that pre_scale will apply the scaling to any translation that follows as well, unless I've misunderstood what you mean. Maybe an extra test could be good 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's say that the original bbox was top-left: (-30, -30) bottom-right: (120, 120) and is then shrunk to top-left: (0, 0) bottom-right: (75, 75). In this case, you will correctly apply a scale of (0.5, 0.5) to reduce the width from 150 to 75, but you also need to translate by (30, 30) to move the origin to (0, 0), or am I missing something?
Would indeed be good to have a test, but not sure how easy it is to construct one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looking at the rendering of firefox and chrome, I can see that the huge region example gaussian blur is much more noticeable than the output, so it is still not 100% correct, I guess, but it doesn't panic at least.
In addition, if i make a new test that shifts the blur to an x and y of 50, the image is sharp on the top left corner and the result is clipped. It is not rendered any differently by resvg though. I think that the primitive transform handling in apply_inner may not be correct, but I'll have to look more into it.
2 participants
Rendering currently panics for SVGs with extremely large filters, like https://github.com/Davidoc26/wallpaper-selector/blob/main/data/icons/io.github.davidoc26.wallpaper_selector.svg.
I am not terribly familiar with this project, but it seems that while the layer will be shrunk if it is too large, the filters are left unchanged, which eventually causes a source / dest size mismatch and panics when they are asserted to be the same. This change shrinks the filter via the transform as well, if necessary, which resolves the issue when I test it and matches the correct rendering.