Include image in tikz with pixel unit
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
In tikzpicture, I can set 1pt as unit but 1px doesn't work! So I guess 1pt equal to 1px. But sounds like almost but not exactly!
This is a example. Original image is 200x150 but the node display is 200.74948ptx150.5621pt!
Should it be exactly 200x150? What's correct way to get 200x150?
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

tikz-pgf
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
In tikzpicture, I can set 1pt as unit but 1px doesn't work! So I guess 1pt equal to 1px. But sounds like almost but not exactly!
This is a example. Original image is 200x150 but the node display is 200.74948ptx150.5621pt!
Should it be exactly 200x150? What's correct way to get 200x150?
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

tikz-pgf
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
In tikzpicture, I can set 1pt as unit but 1px doesn't work! So I guess 1pt equal to 1px. But sounds like almost but not exactly!
This is a example. Original image is 200x150 but the node display is 200.74948ptx150.5621pt!
Should it be exactly 200x150? What's correct way to get 200x150?
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

tikz-pgf
In tikzpicture, I can set 1pt as unit but 1px doesn't work! So I guess 1pt equal to 1px. But sounds like almost but not exactly!
This is a example. Original image is 200x150 but the node display is 200.74948ptx150.5621pt!
Should it be exactly 200x150? What's correct way to get 200x150?
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

tikz-pgf
tikz-pgf
asked 36 mins ago
beetlej
53529
53529
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
I can not tell you why this happens, but I stumbled over this some time ago, and at least back then I did not know if there is a deeper reason. If you look up the conversion rate in the web, you will find that
1cm = 28.3465pt (in web).
However, TikZ claims, as shown in the MWE below, it is
1cm = 28.45274pt (Ti*k*Z).
If you factor in that slight discrepancy, you get, within the rounding errors, a perfect match, as the lowest line in the following output reveals.
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
path let p1=(1cm,0) in node[anchor=west,fill=white] at (0,90) {$x1ne 28.3465pt$};
pgfmathsetmacro{myconv}{28.3465pt/28.45274}
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)*myconv},
n2={(y2-y1)*myconv}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,40) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
I can not tell you why this happens, but I stumbled over this some time ago, and at least back then I did not know if there is a deeper reason. If you look up the conversion rate in the web, you will find that
1cm = 28.3465pt (in web).
However, TikZ claims, as shown in the MWE below, it is
1cm = 28.45274pt (Ti*k*Z).
If you factor in that slight discrepancy, you get, within the rounding errors, a perfect match, as the lowest line in the following output reveals.
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
path let p1=(1cm,0) in node[anchor=west,fill=white] at (0,90) {$x1ne 28.3465pt$};
pgfmathsetmacro{myconv}{28.3465pt/28.45274}
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)*myconv},
n2={(y2-y1)*myconv}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,40) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
I can not tell you why this happens, but I stumbled over this some time ago, and at least back then I did not know if there is a deeper reason. If you look up the conversion rate in the web, you will find that
1cm = 28.3465pt (in web).
However, TikZ claims, as shown in the MWE below, it is
1cm = 28.45274pt (Ti*k*Z).
If you factor in that slight discrepancy, you get, within the rounding errors, a perfect match, as the lowest line in the following output reveals.
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
path let p1=(1cm,0) in node[anchor=west,fill=white] at (0,90) {$x1ne 28.3465pt$};
pgfmathsetmacro{myconv}{28.3465pt/28.45274}
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)*myconv},
n2={(y2-y1)*myconv}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,40) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
I can not tell you why this happens, but I stumbled over this some time ago, and at least back then I did not know if there is a deeper reason. If you look up the conversion rate in the web, you will find that
1cm = 28.3465pt (in web).
However, TikZ claims, as shown in the MWE below, it is
1cm = 28.45274pt (Ti*k*Z).
If you factor in that slight discrepancy, you get, within the rounding errors, a perfect match, as the lowest line in the following output reveals.
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
path let p1=(1cm,0) in node[anchor=west,fill=white] at (0,90) {$x1ne 28.3465pt$};
pgfmathsetmacro{myconv}{28.3465pt/28.45274}
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)*myconv},
n2={(y2-y1)*myconv}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,40) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

I can not tell you why this happens, but I stumbled over this some time ago, and at least back then I did not know if there is a deeper reason. If you look up the conversion rate in the web, you will find that
1cm = 28.3465pt (in web).
However, TikZ claims, as shown in the MWE below, it is
1cm = 28.45274pt (Ti*k*Z).
If you factor in that slight discrepancy, you get, within the rounding errors, a perfect match, as the lowest line in the following output reveals.
documentclass[border=10pt]{standalone}
usepackage{tikz}
usetikzlibrary{calc}
begin{document}
begin{tikzpicture}[x=1pt,y=1pt]
%image source: /usr/local/texlive/2017/texmf-dist//latex/mwe/example-image-4x3.png
node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0,outer sep=0] (image) at (0,0)
{includegraphics{example-image-4x3}};
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)},
n2={(y2-y1)}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,120) {large n1,n2};
path let p1=(1cm,0) in node[anchor=west,fill=white] at (0,90) {$x1ne 28.3465pt$};
pgfmathsetmacro{myconv}{28.3465pt/28.45274}
draw[line width=0.1pt] let
p1=(image.south west),
p2=(image.north east),
n1={(x2-x1)*myconv},
n2={(y2-y1)*myconv}
in node[anchor=west] at (0,40) {large n1,n2};
end{tikzpicture}
end{document}

answered 12 mins ago
marmot
80.9k491173
80.9k491173
Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
Thanks, what's more, if I add [width=200pt] to includepicture, then I can get 200pt width, but the height is 150.01074pt.
– beetlej
2 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463444%2finclude-image-in-tikz-with-pixel-unit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown