Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

4
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Well, that's certainly undesirable! Alpha compositing is supposed to be associative (i0~ImageCompose~(i1~ImageCompose~i2) should equal (i0~ImageCompose~i1)~ImageCompose~i2) and this doesn't do that. One could implement correct alpha compositing manually using ImageApply, but let's see if someone has a better way. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 18, 2014 at 20:57
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I imagine that the documentation was updated just as a result of an automatic processing, and not to show a new/different functionality. Just to make sure that WR will eventually correct the function to our expectations, I think you should send a bug report update, stating that now, not only the function is giving the wrong result, but also the documentation is showing the bug ;-) $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 20, 2014 at 16:25
  • $\begingroup$ @Rahul It would be nice if you post such an implementation. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 21, 2017 at 17:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Alexey Sorry, I don't have the time to do it right now, but the definition of the "over" operator is on the Wikipedia page if you want to take a stab at it. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 21, 2017 at 18:10