[Image-SIG] PIL .paste Bug?

Amadeus Demarzi amadeusdemarzi at gmail.com
Thu Dec 30 12:16:27 CET 2010

Hello All, perhaps you can help me out here.

Not sure if I have found a bug or if I am simply doing it wrong.

Here is a link to files related to the bug to test for yourself (not sure if
this ML would accept attachments or not)


And a quick explanation. The script is SUPER simple. It executes 2 methods,
one that pastes a semi transparent PNG onto a flat color, and the other onto
an existing image, it then saves out 2 images:


If you open up both in a photo editing tool, you will noticed that the
'burn.png' that was pasted into the _broken.png has actually manipulated the
transparency for the entire image, whereas the the _works.png will not have
any full image transparency, and the 'blend' that takes place between
test.png and burn.png works as expected.

My intent is to have burn.png NOT manipulate the transparency of the entire
image when being pasted onto the solid color. Am I missing something is this
a bug? And if this is a bug, is there some sort of workaround for it?

Thanks in advance,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/image-sig/attachments/20101230/9f37b2ad/attachment.html>

More information about the Image-SIG mailing list