how to glue two scans togther

Hi,
does anybody know how to get a scan of a map bigger than my A4 scanner window. surely one have to put two or more scans together. Maybe somebody knows how to acomplish this with Linux tools line gimp. If not any suggestion is welcome. Thanx in advance
zbyszek
--
http://zbyszek.evot.org

Zbigniew Lisiecki wrote in news:d6vbu7$qq7$1
@nemesis.news.tpi.pl:

Hi,
does anybody know how to get a scan of a map bigger than my A4 scanner window. surely one have to put two or more scans together. Maybe somebody knows how to acomplish this with Linux tools line gimp. If not any suggestion is welcome. Thanx in advance
zbyszek

Don't know about gimp but it's easy in photoshop, scan the image, maybe you end up with 2 or more images. Extend the canvas so it's big enough to hold all the pieces, move the pieces into the big area, select 'difference' mode then line up the image layers until they go 100% black and you have a perfect fit. if you were a little off you'll get some edges showing, just use the transform tool to adjust.

--
The problem with the world is that everyone is a few drinks behind.

I see no need to select difference. In fact it might be easier to align the portions if you can actually see the details of the map. How would you do that if the images were 100% black??? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the solution, the question or both.

Peadge :-)

"Peadge" wrote in message

I see no need to select difference. In fact it might be easier to align the portions if you can actually see the details of the map. How would you do that if the images were 100% black??? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the solution, the question or both.

When I have to butt two images, one each layer, I'll set the upper one to a transparency of 85% (that's 15% down from opaque:)) and line up some landmarks. Then mask the difference and be happy. Recently I did this with twelve map sections that combined took over 400" vertical. For the web! :) http://elearning.winona.edu/ald1
Yes, there are some mistakes.

Now I understand.

Peadge ;-)

"Peadge" wrote in
news::

I see no need to select difference. In fact it might be easier to align the portions if you can actually see the details of the map. How would you do that if the images were 100% black??? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the solution, the question or both.

Peadge :-)

Yes you are, difference gives 'perfect' alighnment pure black means a 100% match, using your eye only on a colour scan you could miss distorsion. Try it for yourself.

--
The problem with the world is that everyone is a few drinks behind.

Kingdom wrote:

"Peadge" wrote in
news::

I see no need to select difference. In fact it might be easier to align the portions if you can actually see the details of the map. How would you do that if the images were 100% black??? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the solution, the question or both.

Peadge :-)

Yes you are, difference gives 'perfect' alighnment pure black means a 100% match, using your eye only on a colour scan you could miss distorsion. Try it for yourself.

Did you try Photomerge or some other panoramic stitching program? I would think that would be the easiest way to do it.

Clyde

Clyde wrote in
news::

Kingdom wrote:

"Peadge" wrote in
news::

I see no need to select difference. In fact it might be easier to align the portions if you can actually see the details of the map. How would you do that if the images were 100% black??? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the solution, the question or both.

Peadge :-)

Yes you are, difference gives 'perfect' alighnment pure black means a 100% match, using your eye only on a colour scan you could miss distorsion. Try it for yourself.

Did you try Photomerge or some other panoramic stitching program? I would think that would be the easiest way to do it.

Clyde

See what happens when you think and are not used to it. lol

--
The problem with the world is that everyone is a few drinks behind.