none

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:26 am

Thanks to all who contributed.

JRL · Post by **JRL** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:46 pm

Have you looked at Me_again's technique for converting a Macro Scheduler provided color number to an RGB value? That will give you a color value in three ranges of 256. Perhaps more understandable.

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Tue Apr 03, 2007 1:47 am

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:25 am

cheers

Me_again · Post by **Me_again** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:34 am

Match = 100 will be true if 100% of the pixels in the two bitmaps are the same (and the bitmaps must be the same size/shape). In other words the two bitmaps are a perfect match.

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 1:14 am

Me_again · Post by **Me_again** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 3:33 am

In bitmapcompare the pixels either match or they don't. It doesn't matter if you compare white with black, or white with not quite whiite, the result is that they are counted as not matching.

Sounds like GetRectCheckSum> might work for you, that will generate a value based on both position and color of the pixels. It seems to be quite sensitive. I tested a 10x10 pixel area, white with about 12 colored pixels. The result I got with three different colors for those 12 pixels was:

Red: 96052987
Green: 102692913
Slightly different Green: 102644143

If that doesn't work maybe look at something like imagemagick that has more sophisticated image comparison functions, and can be automated with macroscheduler.

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Wed May 02, 2007 3:37 am

thanks

Rain · Post by **Rain** » Thu May 03, 2007 12:32 pm

I could be wrong but it looks like someone is trying to read the security images websites use to keep bots from registering and/or spamming their website. IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m a website owner my self and donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to see anymore spam on my website than I already have. I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s wise to post the solution in public, thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s if there is a one of course.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Rain

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Thu May 03, 2007 1:45 pm

Post by **Marcus Tettmar** » Thu May 03, 2007 1:56 pm

Now, now. I'm sure no one meant to offend anyone.

Although, I have to say I've never understood the need to automate a computer game - isn't that defeating the object of the game in the first place?

Anyway, I can see with my own eyes that the two bitmaps are different, so you won't get a match. With CompareBitmaps I got a 47% match. The colours are different.

Rain · Post by **Rain** » Thu May 03, 2007 5:51 pm

IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m sorry to have offended you. However, I did say "I could be wrong" and Ã¢â‚¬Å“Please correct me if I'm wrongÃ¢â‚¬Â

rawill · Post by **rawill** » Mon May 21, 2007 2:17 am

jj_willis · Post by **jj_willis** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:44 pm

The FindImagePos command has a tolerence option that sounds like what you are looking for. I am not sure how you can incorporate it yet, I am still new with MacroScheduler.

Snickers · Post by **Snickers** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:14 pm

There is only 75 pixels in that image.

Simply recored the top left coordinates to start recording pixel colors. Then determine the bottom right corner for pixel coordinates.

have the macro record the pixel colors at 75 locations. Therefore, you would create 75 variables.

Have the macro then record the second image into a different set of 75 variables.

Have the macro finally compare all 75 variables to the 2nd set of 75 variables. if they all match, then you know they are the same.