Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have an image I would like to make 50-100 copies of, but for each copy a label is added in the form of a number corresponding to the copy number.

Is there existing software that does this? Is there a way to do this efficiently?

At the moment I am manually editing and saving each copy with photoshop.

share|improve this question

Imagemagick springs to mind. It's free and runs on every operating system of interest, including Windows and Linux. Here's the blurb:

ImageMagick® is a software suite to create, edit, compose, or convert bitmap images. It can read and write images in a variety of formats (over 100) including DPX, EXR, GIF, JPEG, JPEG-2000, PDF, PhotoCD, PNG, Postscript, SVG, and TIFF. Use ImageMagick to resize, flip, mirror, rotate, distort, shear and transform images, adjust image colors, apply various special effects, or draw text, lines, polygons, ellipses and Bézier curves.

It's a command line tool and therefore eminiently scriptable - provided you can read the documentation. (It's too late at night for me to try. ;) )

EDIT: Aww, shucks. Here's an example command that will annotate AngryCat.jpg with the text Copy 1 in the top left corner, producing output AngryCat_Copy1.jpg:

convert AngryCat.jpg -annotate 90 "Copy 1" AngryCat_Copy1.jpg

Documentation for -annotate. To do this 50 times, you just need a script that will vary the annotation text Copy 1 through 1-50 and the output filename AngryCat_Copy1.jpg through 1-50. (If you tell us what platform you're on, i.e. Win XP, Win 7, Linux, OSX, we might be able to provide an actual batch script.)

share|improve this answer
Thanks a lot, I used a similar piece of software XnView actually. Did almost what I wanted, but had to make 100 copies of the image first. – Tim Greene Feb 15 '12 at 16:09
Did it actually solve the question you originally asked? If so you should write it up as an answer to the question. – Li-aung Yip Feb 15 '12 at 16:33
Not strictly no, I may add that stipulation to the original question. It still involves making the copies first then converting the copied files, which is a bit sloppy – Tim Greene Feb 15 '12 at 19:02

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .