On 20 Mar 2004, Sven Neumann wrote: > "William Skaggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Actually the reality is that Gimp, with the standard plug-ins, does > > not have the ability to do this, although there are ways to fake > > something that looks sort of like it. The easiest way to get it > > would be to modify the "blur" filter (found in randomize.c in the > > plug-ins directory) so that the probability values are derived from > > a map-image rather than constant. This would really be a valuable > > thing to have. > > Combining a blurred picture with an unblurred picture using layer mask > seems to work well for me. Of course it's not the same but it should > look reasonably similar. >
What is the best technique? What you suggest or the one that follows? Are there any problems with these two ways, compared with the "mod of the blur filter" way? On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Jakub Steiner wrote: > Just create an appropriate selection for the blur filter. The fastest > method in this case would be toggling the quickmask, creating the > gradient, toggling back and applying the blur filter. > _______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
