Bitmap import into schematic

James Morrison wrote:

Joerg wrote on Tue, 10 May 2011 15:14

>> Tilmann Reh wrote:

>> Wish I knew how. The other thing that happens is that rendering in

>> Eagle

>> becomes very slow after import.

>> http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

Hi Joerg,

 

The reason EAGLE becomes slower is because the bitmap import is creating a

small rectangle for every pixel (or number of pixels, depending on scale

factor you selected).  The idea is that you then use that as a guide and

draw bigger objects (like one rectangle for 100's of the little pixels) on

the layers you want (like tplace typically).  Then delete all the objects

on the importing layers used.

 

Yeah, it ain't useful for what I was planning to do, marking up other

people's schematics taken by snapshot out of PDF.

It's not perfect and not real polished.  But it will work--I've done it for

a bunch of different logos.

 

For logos I can imagine it'll work. But for schematic work the imported

(and converted) bitmap makes it way too slow to be useful. So here I

thought I had found a really wacky use for Eagle but fell on my behind

Guess I'll keep buying red pens and white-out then. Some day they may

not even carry white-out because nobody uses typewriters anymore.

--

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.

Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg wrote on Tue, 10 May 2011 20:26

It's not perfect and not real polished.  But it will work--I've

done it for

a bunch of different logos.

 

 

For logos I can imagine it'll work. But for schematic work the

imported

(and converted) bitmap makes it way too slow to be useful. So here I

thought I had found a really wacky use for Eagle but fell on my behind

I hope in EAGLE 6 they allow for pasting in real images like a word

document.  In the schematic it should be easy enough I would think.  It's a

great way to document things like boot mode resistor settings and other

configurations.  In other tools I'll copy a section right out of the

datasheet and paste it right into the schematic--nice and quick and no

typos.  You can also paste in any other information to help document the

design.

In the board editor, I can see it being a bit more complicated.  But I'm

sure they could make a special layer for this that doesn't have any real

electrical use.  Maybe the CAM processor just ignores these objects.  It

would be useful for the same reasons and more.

Cheers,

James.

--

James Morrison  ~~~  Stratford Digital

Specializing in CadSoft EAGLE

• Online Sales to North America

• Electronic Design Services

• EAGLE Enterprise Toolkit

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

Joerg schrieb:

Slowly I get the impression this isn't such a useful thing for the

purpose I want it for, at least not with Eagle. What I planned was this:

Receive PDF schematics from a client. Snapshot large sections out of

those, place in Eagle, delete stuff, draw some new stuff in there so

their circuit will work alright, print to PDF and send back.

Yes, this is exactly not what it's for.

Tilmann

"Joerg" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:iq1e4i$9su$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

This is not at all urgent but maybe someone has an idea. Yesterday I had

a situation that happens a lot. I received a schematic that was in need

of some minor redesign. Only in PDF, like usual. So this time I wanted

to see if Eagle can do the redlines by importing a black&white bitmap

snapshot out of the PDF file. Then I wanted to draw the extra stuff in

red.

 

Long story short in a graphics program the bitmap looked crisp and

clear. After importing it into an Eagle schematics window it was all

blurry like I had ten beers and with a bright yellow background. Useless

for any redline work, so I did it as usual with a red pen and my

scanner. Why is that rendering so badly in Eagle?

After reading all your stuff here it appears like you dont have two color

bitmap.

Here is a windows guide how to get that:

-open the pdf (or whatever doc)

-resize it to requested size

-with window in focus, press ALT+PrintScrn keys on keyboard (window grab to

paste buffer)

-run mspaint (std windows app)

-Paste the image here (press CTRL+v)

-The whole image is now selected and you may drag the interesting part to

upper left corner

-crop image by finding the right and bottom image handles and drag them in

-(you may want to do a temporary save here now)

-Goto Image->Atributes and pick b/w (this may distort edges if the image of

the pfd was jpg compressed)

-clean it up

-Save it as monochrome bitmap

James Morrison wrote:

Joerg wrote on Tue, 10 May 2011 20:26

>>> It's not perfect and not real polished.  But it will work--I've

>>> done it for

>>> a bunch of different logos.

>>>

>> For logos I can imagine it'll work. But for schematic work the

>> imported

>> (and converted) bitmap makes it way too slow to be useful. So here I

>> thought I had found a really wacky use for Eagle but fell on my behind

>>

 

I hope in EAGLE 6 they allow for pasting in real images like a word

document.  In the schematic it should be easy enough I would think.  It's a

great way to document things like boot mode resistor settings and other

configurations.  In other tools I'll copy a section right out of the

datasheet and paste it right into the schematic--nice and quick and no

typos.  You can also paste in any other information to help document the

design.

Absolutely. Maybe you remember TV set schematics from the good old days?

They had dozens of oscilloscope plots in there, often in the form of

photos because back then no (affordable) computers existed. These "mini

plots" told the reader of the schematic what to look for, how the

signals had to be. Very effective for the diagnosis of a faulty set.

Seems the only way to do that with Eagle is to finish the schematic,

export to a graphics format, load it into some photo shop type

application and add the pics there.

Would be nice if V6 was a bit better in the graphics import features but

it's only a "nice to have", not so essential. Hierarchy is much more

important, that can really help Eagle move more into the mainstream. It

won't stand a chance without, IMHO.

 

In the board editor, I can see it being a bit more complicated.  But I'm

sure they could make a special layer for this that doesn't have any real

electrical use.  Maybe the CAM processor just ignores these objects.  It

would be useful for the same reasons and more.

 

In a layout I wouldn't really know what it'd be good for. I do the same

kind of reviewing with layouts. But there I just import a chunk of the

Gerbers into, ahem, MS-Paint. Then lots of delete, copy, paste and now

the client or layouter has instructions how to re-route stuff so they

pass EMC this time.

--

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Joerg wrote on Wed, 11 May 2011 10:24

I hope in EAGLE 6 they allow for pasting in real images like a

word

document.  In the schematic it should be easy enough I would think.

It's a

great way to document things like boot mode resistor settings and

other

configurations.  In other tools I'll copy a section right out of

the

datasheet and paste it right into the schematic--nice and quick and

no

typos.  You can also paste in any other information to help

document the

design.

 

Absolutely. Maybe you remember TV set schematics from the good old

days?

They had dozens of oscilloscope plots in there, often in the form of

photos because back then no (affordable) computers existed. These

"mini

plots" told the reader of the schematic what to look for, how the

signals had to be. Very effective for the diagnosis of a faulty set.

There are lots of ways you could paste in diagrams, charts, datasheet

snippets, block diagrams, ... that would all help document the design.

Quote:

In the board editor, I can see it being a bit more complicated.

But I'm

sure they could make a special layer for this that doesn't have any

real

electrical use.  Maybe the CAM processor just ignores these

objects.  It

would be useful for the same reasons and more.

 

 

In a layout I wouldn't really know what it'd be good for. I do the

same

kind of reviewing with layouts. But there I just import a chunk of the

Gerbers into, ahem, MS-Paint. Then lots of delete, copy, paste and now

the client or layouter has instructions how to re-route stuff so they

pass EMC this time.

Images I would paste into a PCB:

1)  datasheet snippets (text and images) that discuss layout issues and

recommendations

2)  mechanical drawings

3)  stackup diagrams, e.g. screen shot from HyperLynx

4)  connector pinout diagrams from design specs

That is just off the top of my head.

I think one of the most frustrating things to me is CadSoft seems to

consider documentation to not be part of the design.  To me, this sort of

documentation is as much a part of a successful design as the actual traces

and vias.  This is especially true when more than one person works on the

design.

With Altium changing their strategy and seemingly trying to become a higher

and higher level design tool, it seems to be that the value CAD market is

ripe for domination by EAGLE.

And the sad part is, most of these features that everyone uses and EAGLE

can do, it just doesn't do very well or doesn't do it out of the box,

wouldn't take very long to integrate in properly and improve the newbie

experience by a big percentage.

Then there are the more advanced features like heirarchy and differential

routing which pushes CadSoft into the more professional tool arena.

By doing these things, I would think that EAGLE would start taking a big

amount of market share from others.  When a lifetime license is less than a

one year service contract, who can argue.  Very few companies need the big,

vertical toolsets.  Some do, most don't.

Cheers,

James.

--

James Morrison  ~~~  Stratford Digital

Specializing in CadSoft EAGLE

• Online Sales to North America

• Electronic Design Services

• EAGLE Enterprise Toolkit

--

Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

James Morrison wrote:

Joerg wrote on Wed, 11 May 2011 10:24

>>> In the board editor, I can see it being a bit more complicated.

>>> But I'm

>>> sure they could make a special layer for this that doesn't have any

>>> real

>>> electrical use.  Maybe the CAM processor just ignores these

>>> objects.  It

>>> would be useful for the same reasons and more.

>>>

>> In a layout I wouldn't really know what it'd be good for. I do the

>> same

>> kind of reviewing with layouts. But there I just import a chunk of the

>> Gerbers into, ahem, MS-Paint. Then lots of delete, copy, paste and now

>> the client or layouter has instructions how to re-route stuff so they

>> pass EMC this time.

 

Images I would paste into a PCB:

1)  datasheet snippets (text and images) that discuss layout issues and

recommendations

2)  mechanical drawings

3)  stackup diagrams, e.g. screen shot from HyperLynx

4)  connector pinout diagrams from design specs

 

That is just off the top of my head.

 

Ok, that's a bit unusual to me but then again I don't do layouts.

I think one of the most frustrating things to me is CadSoft seems to

consider documentation to not be part of the design.  To me, this sort of

documentation is as much a part of a successful design as the actual traces

and vias.  This is especially true when more than one person works on the

design.

 

Back since the days of Orcad-SDT I have a strict rule that still

applies: When I start a design I never start in the schematic editor but

always with Word document. All pertinent information from the client

goes in there first, becoming chapter 1 or the spec. Then as ideas come

up text and schematics are developed concurrently, including

explanations why I used an I/Q mixer over yonder and not a filter

approach, stuff like that. So if I get hit by a falling meteorite

someone else can pick it up right from there.

With Altium changing their strategy and seemingly trying to become a higher

and higher level design tool, it seems to be that the value CAD market is

ripe for domination by EAGLE.

 

Their move to China didn't instill much confidence in me.

And the sad part is, most of these features that everyone uses and EAGLE

can do, it just doesn't do very well or doesn't do it out of the box,

wouldn't take very long to integrate in properly and improve the newbie

experience by a big percentage.

 

Then there are the more advanced features like heirarchy and differential

routing which pushes CadSoft into the more professional tool arena.

 

I never understood why the hierarchy was pushed out as "not so

important". Until a week ago I worked with a schematic of over 50 pages.

Without a hierarchy that would have been over 150 pages. I see no way a

project of that magnitude could be handled with the current versions of

Eagle.

By doing these things, I would think that EAGLE would start taking a big

amount of market share from others.  When a lifetime license is less than a

one year service contract, who can argue.  Very few companies need the big,

vertical toolsets.  Some do, most don't.

 

Integrated is nice, for example I cannot simulate from within Eagle and

I've had a couple of cases where schematic transcription errors snuck

in. Then again Orcad-PSpice which is fully integrated crashed on me so

many times the last couple of months that I really don't want that to be

my main CAD tool.

--

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Morten Leikvoll wrote:

"Joerg" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:iq1e4i$9su$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

>> This is not at all urgent but maybe someone has an idea. Yesterday I had

>> a situation that happens a lot. I received a schematic that was in need

>> of some minor redesign. Only in PDF, like usual. So this time I wanted

>> to see if Eagle can do the redlines by importing a black&white bitmap

>> snapshot out of the PDF file. Then I wanted to draw the extra stuff in

>> red.

>>

>> Long story short in a graphics program the bitmap looked crisp and

>> clear. After importing it into an Eagle schematics window it was all

>> blurry like I had ten beers and with a bright yellow background. Useless

>> for any redline work, so I did it as usual with a red pen and my

>> scanner. Why is that rendering so badly in Eagle?

 

After reading all your stuff here it appears like you dont have two color

bitmap.

Here is a windows guide how to get that:

-open the pdf (or whatever doc)

-resize it to requested size

-with window in focus, press ALT+PrintScrn keys on keyboard (window grab to

paste buffer)

-run mspaint (std windows app)

-Paste the image here (press CTRL+v)

-The whole image is now selected and you may drag the interesting part to

upper left corner

-crop image by finding the right and bottom image handles and drag them in

-(you may want to do a temporary save here now)

-Goto Image->Atributes and pick b/w (this may distort edges if the image of

the pfd was jpg compressed)

-clean it up

-Save it as monochrome bitmap

 

That's actually what I had done initially to reduce the colors to 16.

There were other reviewers before me so a little color left in there

would have been nice. Eagle ate it but the results were not good.

So now I reduced it to stricly B/W, no color, no gray scale. Still not

very good. According to several folks in this thread it seems Eagle just

isn't made to do this. No problem, I just thought it would have been

nice if it could do such reviewer edits.

Oh well, next time it's going to have to be directly done in MS-Paint

then. In case anyone is interested here, you need to load a 2nd instance

of MS-Paint and have the symbols on that one. Like this:

http://www.eham.net/articles/7255?ehamsid=8433m8oku8evctrhqgokh61pg7

One way to generate the symbols would be to place all the ones you'll

need on a blank Eagle schematic and then export that as a graphics file,

in a format that MS-Paint can read.

--

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.

Use another domain or send PM.

"Joerg" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:iqegru$583$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

That's actually what I had done initially to reduce the colors to 16.

There were other reviewers before me so a little color left in there

would have been nice. Eagle ate it but the results were not good.

Maybe you could post the final bitmap (raw) before importing, so we can have

a look at that?

Morten Leikvoll wrote:

"Joerg" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message

news:iqegru$583$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

>> That's actually what I had done initially to reduce the colors to 16.

>> There were other reviewers before me so a little color left in there

>> would have been nice. Eagle ate it but the results were not good.

 

Maybe you could post the final bitmap (raw) before importing, so we can have

a look at that?

 

Can't post the schematic because that would violate confidentiality with

my client. But the same happened when I tried to import a random graph

from an NXP datasheet. The Cadsoft server limits attachments to 50k so I

posted a snippet of that in my response to Tilman. Have attached it again.

I can import that when selecting only one color (black) but it doesn't

look very good and makes Eagle behave like molasses.

--

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/