Re: [Gimp-user] templates

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Paul Le Grice  wrote:

> I am new to Gimp and want to use it to create individual body maps of skin
> lesions by drawing on a body part template and pasting to patient notes.
>  However, when I save a body map as a template, I can't seem to access it
> again to modify.  Am I overlooking something?
> thanks
>
Yes. A template currently isn't a full image, just the basic characteristics
like Width, Height, and (possibly, don't remember for sure) Fill .
Until such time as full XCF templates are implemented, I suggest instead
making the base body map, copying the XCF you just made, and finally
creating a custom launcher which passes the path of that XCF to GIMP.
Then every time you needed to create a new record, use that launcher. That
way you would immediately have that base XCF loaded, ready to make a
modified version from, each time you start GIMP.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Working with imported images and layers

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Fred J  wrote:

> **
> This, besides the text tool, is probably one of the most unintuitive
> features in Gimp.
>
> - Find an image on Google / hard drive.
> - Drop it into your working area.
> - Change it's transparency.
> - Resize / Rotate and, suddenly, the transparency reverts to original
> state.
>
> This last step makes no sense.  I changed its transparency for a reason and
> it must stay that way until I say so.
>

And it does stay that way. Currently, we have an opacity control in the
transform dialog. This defaults to 100% IIRC. It only effects the *display*
during transform. The opacity setting of the layer is unaffected, it's
simply not in operation during that time.

(There are various logical problems with using the layer's opacity during
transforms... eg, transforming part of a layer -> overlapping parts are
inaccurate, and non-overlapping parts may be inaccurate if the layer has no
alpha channel. Same applies to transforming a whole layer.. because the
original is not, and must not be, hidden during the transform, inheriting
the layer opacity causes problems with the accuracy of the display)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Why is 16/32bpp taking so long?

[David Gowers (kampu)]

Some points:

* These are not forums. This is a mailing list. Accessing it through the
unofficial gimpusers.com 'forum interface' doesn't change that fact.

* The official GIMP site has problems, mainly to do with lacking a
maintainer. It tends to be only updated on releases and other major events
like Google Summer Of Code. So it's often not up to date with any more minor
information.

* GIMP developers are fairly committed to doing this the right way, rather
than the simple/buggy way. What does this mean? Well, for example,
   Photoshop is still yet to properly support high bit depth (16/32bpc)
images -- instead it provides a small subset of operations. Most other image
manipulation apps I've tried, this is also true for. This is by way of
saying...

* Supporting multiple image types in a generic, non hacky way is a HARD
problem (mainly because of all the existing code that is built around
obsolete assumptions). One of the Michael's has been developing a testing
system, which as it matures will allow code to be upgraded more aggressively
(because it will provide a way to determine, automatically, whether said
code is still behaving *correctly*). There is also a GSOC project currently
underway to port some of the default set of GIMP plugins to the GEGL
architecture

* There are not very many active GIMP or GEGL developers. So, in a real
sense, it's because YOU (for whatever value of you) are not progressing the
development of GIMP and/ or GEGL.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Question on Layer Blending Modes

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:39 AM, kevin gilbert  wrote:
> In the section "5.8 Practical Uses of Blending Modes" of the book "Grokking
> the GIMP" (see, e.g., http://www.dig.cs.gc.cuny.edu/manuals/Gimp2/Grokking-
> the-GIMP-v1.0/node57.html ) there is an example of how to use blending modes
> to alter the colour of a cat.
>
> Specifically, I refer to Figure 5.29(a) where the re-coloured cat does not
> appear to sit naturally on the person's shoulder (cf Figure 5.26(a)).
>
> How can the defect be overcome? Would feathering the selection help? But would
> the bucket fill also be feathered?

The defect arises from:

1. use of the Color layer mode (which, until recent versions of GIMP,
was a fairly inaccurate way of recoloring anything. particularly, it
performed quite poorly at maintaining similar perceptual brightness.).
A better alternative might be the Color layer mode in more recent
(2.7+) GIMP versions, or the LAB color mixer found in G'MIC

2. Failure to consider radiosity (the coloured light which is
reflected from the shirt to the cat, and the coloured light that is
reflected from the cat to the shirt.
If you change the color of one part of a photo, you will need to
adjust the surrounding objects to appear to reflect the right color.

3. Quite frequently also the new colors are poorly chosen, so that it
mismatches the overall lighting conditions. You need to ensure that
the recoloring matches not only in perceptual brightness, but also in
vividness: the apparent vividness of an object is heavily limited by
the lighting conditions

4. Lastly, the actual shape of the mask you are using to mark which
pixels count as 'cat' for purposes of recoloring; merely selecting
those regions which seem to clearly be cat regions results in an area
that is too strongly defined.
You can sometimes get away with using feathering, if the object is not
particularly in focus. The rest of the time, some edges need to be
fuzzy and some need to be crisp (basically in relation to their angle
to the light.)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] wavelet sharpen - cannot find it in 2.6

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:06 PM, Carusoswi  wrote:
> . . . so, I'm running Gimp as installed from the ubuntu repositories (Ubuntu 
> version 10.10), and I was reading up on the most useful of Gimp plugins, and 
> I came upon thie wavelet sharpen plugin.  Sounds great.  The text tells me 
> which lib file to install from the Ubuntu Synaptic listing, and I find that 
> this lib file is already installed.
>
> Following the instructions, I look for this plugin under Filters-> Enhance -> 
> and . . . well, I cannot find it.  I find wavelet denoise, but not wavelet 
> sharpen.
>

Hi Carusoswi,
I suggest you learn to use the Plug-in browser ('Help->Plugin browser'
in the image menu.).. it can help you to find out a number of details
about any given plugin (including, by implication, whether a given
plugin is NOT installed). Try putting in 'wavelet' as a search term;
this will find all the wavelet related plugins.

Personally (I'm running Arch Linux), the distro I am running does not
have a wavelet-sharpen package. I have the denoise and decompose
plugins installed, only, with regard to wavelet stuff.

I'm now downloading the latest wavelet-sharpen plugin from
http://registry.gimp.org/node/9836 ,compiling, and installing it.

Okay, it should show up under Filters->Enhance once you have
successfully installed it.
It works fine for me when I manually install it, so I suspect that either:

a) the Ubuntu package is defective
or
b) you haven't actually installed the right package.

My father runs an ubuntu system, so I checked out the package listings there.
>From what I can see, there is no wavelet sharpen package in the
standard repositories.
What package are you talking about?

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] commercial use

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Matthew Corrie Wade
 wrote:
> Hello.  I would like to be able to use Gimp to alter designs for commercial
> use - is this allowed?  Thanks for your time.
>
> --
> Matthew Corrie Wade
> Seducing the Count
> Breathing Geometry & Dance
> www.seducingthecount.com
> 0401096079
>

Hi, the license of GIMP (GPL) makes no comment on works created via
use of the software, so it is unrestricted. The term "derivative
works" in the GPL has confused some people at various times -- it
means a derived software, though, not any manner of thing which is
created *by* the software.
For example, there are commercial software packages for Linux compiled
with GCC; The compilation result is 'program output', not a derivative
work.

Hope that clarifies things.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Merging n everything

[David Gowers (kampu)]

GIMP-GAP plugin does what you want.

1. Convert your text into a GAP animation,
2. Convert your background into a gap animation (duplicate that single
frame 69 or however many times -- you can do the whole thing in a few
clicks using Video->Duplicate frames)
3. Use GAP's navigator to move to the first frame of both animations
(they must both be open in GIMP)
3. Use Video->Move Path, on the 'background' animation. Set the 'from
frame..to frame' parameters to cover the entire number of frames and
select the text image as source.
Depending on whether the dimensions of your text animation match the
background, you may also want to adjust the X and Y offsets.

For animations of any complexity, I recommend you use GIMP-GAP. The
facilities built in to GIMP are really quite basic.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:11 AM, rainman400  wrote:
> ok now heres the deal .. i do knw a tediously long and tiring way to fix this 
> but i was hoping there would be an easier way
>
> i have a background image around with i want to add an animated flaming text 
> and a video which i converted to frames already. I have about 70 frames that 
> i want to add, so i made a animated text that lasts 70 frames too... i just 
> thought it was the logical thing to do ...
>
> now the way i know around it is to actually manually copy and paste each 
> layer of the xcf i got from saving the animated text onto the each layer in a 
> new xcf with the main background.. but for 70 odd frames that gonna be a 
> pain. and i was thinking it would probably work with the frames i got from 
> the video as well...
>
> so is there an easier way out .. im sure there is ... coz i opened the text 
> xcf using open as layers... but dont knw how to merge the whole thing.
>
> thanks in advance
>
> --
> rainman400 (via gimpusers.com)
> ___
> Gimp-user mailing list
> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Why doesn't "drawable area" follow the dimensions of a layer?

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Lambertus  wrote:
>>Hello David and thank you for the quick reply!
>
>>Now, using the word "Canvas" rather than "Drawable area" makes things a lot
>>more sane immediately, and your
>>explanation is accurate and acceptable.
>
> Maybe this is the same situation I have.
>
> I have a picture (picture 1).
> I expand the size of the canvas to make room to copy another picture beside 
> the original (picture 2).
> Picture 2 is copied from an open GIMP image and pasted into the enlarged 
> canvas area of picture 1.
> Picture 2 is invisible if it dragged outside the bounds of picture 1 into an 
> open area of the canvas.
> I can't figure out why that would be a useful design characteristic and how 
> to change the situation to make the imported pictures visible on the expanded 
> canvas.
You don't want the image dimensions to change constantly, right? that
would FUBAR your export consistency, which is pretty important for
aligning features (eg in a website layout). That's why.

As for a solution, positioning the layer where you want and using 'fit
canvas to layers' should solve it. Alternatively you can directly
resize the image canvas.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp 2.6's Clipboard Brush - disable possible?

[David Gowers (kampu)]

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:13 PM, SilversleevesX
 wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This is my first post to the list.
>
> I wanted to know if it were possible to disable the Clipboard Brush
> feature in GIMP 2.6?
>
> Frankly, I think a better direction for something copied or cut to the
> Clipboard would be to Patterns, not Brushes. As a longtime Photoshop
> user (4 versions on Mac OS, two on Windows), I've no doubt that the
> minor hassle of turning tweensy picture X.jpeg into a pattern will be
> something I'll remember to my dying day. If an intuitive shortcut should
> be applied to clipboard/pasteboard data in a graphics app, patterns seem
> to me the more useful of the two directions.
Well, you have both. What's the problem?
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Increasing pixel size

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Andrew  wrote:
> On 07/25/2010 03:49 AM, Byram wrote:
>
> I have an old 7 mp image that I'm trying to increase to around 10MP.  I've
> read it's best to increase by 10%, then unsharpen, and repeat process until
> you get to the desired result.
>
> I unsharpened with radius at 5, threshold 15, and amount .5.
>
> When I finished the process.  I viewed the image at 100% and it was
> terrible.
> Any recommendations regarding the process or the unsharpened mask settings?
>
> Thanks.

I have tried Resynthesizer 'smart enlarge' and found it lacking.
GMIC 'smart resize' is much, much better.. I am VERY happy with it.

(smart resize is found in Enhancement subsection in GMIC plugin)

Just work out the percentage difference between the old size and new
size (in this case i suspect 3648 / 3056 == 119%.. or ) and input that
in the width and height fields (including the % sign)
I recommend anisotropy 1.0. Smoothing should be >= the scaling ratio
(so, >= 1.19 in this example). Sharpness is something you will just
need to experiment with to get the kind of results you want: 12 is a
good starting point IMO)

Note that it is fairly slow for large images, so try it on a small
crop first. :)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Smoothing inked lines?

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Marc Carson  wrote:
> I've been scanning inks into GIMP, then moving them over to Inkscape for
> tracing to make the lines smoother. Is there a way to do this in GIMP alone?
> I don't mean vector tracing, just getting rid of the smaller abnormalities
> or fuzziness around my inked lines. I already scan at 600 dpi.
> Here's an example:
> http://www.friendlyskies.net/projects/comics/before-after.png
> Thanks!

Yes, you may want a combination of
1. Despeckle (to eliminate specks)
2. GMIC Anisotropic Smoothing (GMIC plugin:gmic.sf.net)
with a relatively large radius, large tensor-smoothing value, and
anisotropy = 1.0. Experiment with different values of 'sharpness' --
you may need to reduce it below the default 0.70 to get as much
smoothing as you want.

Another solution:
If you are running linux, you will probably have the tools to make a
batch-processing script or Python GIMP plugin that uses PoTrace
(commandline tool;same algorithym as is integrated into Inkscape).
Potrace has options to output a PGM (ie a greyscale raster, rather
than a vector -- like SVG etc) to do tracing/smoothing.
This could be the fastest and most reliable, high quality option, once
you have worked out the options appropriate for your work.

The most important options for Potrace would probably be

--alphamax  #how smooth the output is. 0..1.43, default 1.0.
--blacklevel  #the black/white threshold -- in the range 0..1.
--turdsize  #this discards junk pixels -- pixel islands of N size
--pgm  #set output format to PGM raster, or..
--svg   #you could get an SVG -- if you wanted a larger output than input.
--width 
--height  # set output dimensions

Hope one of those suggestions help. :)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Why doesn't "drawable area" follow the dimensions of a layer?

[David Gowers]

Hello Janne,

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Janne Kronback  wrote:
> I used GIMP yesterday after a break of a few months and spend the first hour
> being frustrated.
> Part of it was because I was using a Swedish version which I haven't tried
> before, so all the names were strange at first...
>
> Anyhow, the manual (chapter 8) says nothing about the issue I had.
> I copied a part of the image as a new layer which I was to "tile" to get a
> bigger surface. I naturally resized the layer x*y times to make room for it
> (I know there are tools to do this, they did however not give me the result
> I was after).

In this situation, I usually adjust the canvas size and select the
option which adjusts all layer sizes accordingly.

> I was then to copy that piece of texture again and paste it into the same
> layer and move it to the correct position repeatedly when the strange thing
> happened..
> The texture just disappeared into nothingness the moment it was slid out of
> the border of the original texture! Even though the layer boundaries was
> resized,
> I could not use it.

You could. It just looked like it was not being pasted. That's an
illusion created by the combination of your method and GIMP's
treatment of layer content outside canvas bounds.

>
> The manual explicitly says:
> "Note: he amount of memory that a layer consumes is determined by its
> dimensions, not its contents. So, if you are working with large images or
> images that contain many layers, it might pay off to trim layers to the
> minimum possible size. "
>
> Why did I resize the layer, consume more memory but wasn't allowed to use it
> until I, in another menu, chose "expand drawable area to the boundaries of
> the layer" (in swedish).

You will not be able to see anything outside of the bounds of the
*image*; I expect the menu item that you were looking at was the same
as the english item "Fit Canvas to Layers".

The canvas is the boundary size of the image (and it is usually what
you will find you want to really adjust, rather than layer boundary
size)

> This doesn't feel like it should be the default behaviour. Out of curiosity,
> why would you want to expand a layer that you cannot draw on?

I suspect you want to reword that question, as there is no such thing
as a layer which you actually cannot draw on (except by explicitly
indicating you want that, using the 'lock pixels' or 'lock alpha'
toggles).
It's perfectly possible to set things up so you are likely to THINK
you cannot draw on a layer as it's not visible; but such thoughts are
inaccurate, you can draw, paste, etc on it just the same as any other
layer; the layer just is not visible until you move your layer back
within canvas bounds

Hope that helps,

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Edit Zoom ratios?

[David Gowers]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Mark  wrote:
> I do a lot of picture rendering and find myself zooming images to ratios of
> 3:1 and 6:1 (300% and 600%, respectively) for a majority of jobs. Can these be
> added to the popup menu at the bottom of the window instead of having to
> manually enter these values each time via View > Zoom > Other?
>
> Thank you very much.
>
For 300%, isn't it easier just to hit 2, +?
In any case, while it would be a good enhancement to be able to
customize zooming, you should not *need* to use View->Zoom->Other.
Just highlight the first character in the popup (assuming the popup
says something like '800%'), type 6, hit Enter. No dialog required.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

[Gimp-user] What do web designers want from GIMP?

[David Gowers]

Hello GIMP users,

I am working on a book for about GIMP 2.6 recipes for web design
elements. I am currently researching on this question: what do web
designers want to know how to do with GIMP?

Do you design websites and have an interest in reading a book about
this topic? Please respond*:

* What tasks do you want to know how to do using GIMP?

* What tasks do you find excessively difficult to do with GIMP or
believe that there *must* be a better way than your current way?

* Is there any topic that you feel it's particularly important to cover?


Thank you :)

David Gowers



* aside from you, saulgoode :) -- thanks.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] ?? Status of remembering Layers setting for Canvas Resizing -- in most recent version

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> If this issue has not been addressed yet and if I can't find anything in
> Bugzilla on it, I want to make an Enhancement Suggestion, first on the
> Gimp-Developer list, then Bugzilla.
>
> However, I don't have the quick or convenient ability to check the
> current status of this issue in the most recent Gimp version.  (I am a
> "user only" and am not involved in installing such programs.)  I am
> hoping that somebody who has the most recent version can check this for
> me.  Thanks in advance.
>
> Image > Canvas Size
> in the "Set Image Canvas Size" dialog
> in the Layers section at the bottom
> there are five different possible settings, including None, All Layers,
> etc. etc.
>
> In Gimp 2.6.6 (Ubuntu Linux 8.04) this defaults to "None" and ALWAYS
> remains none EVERY time I go to the dialog, even if I had it changed to
> something else on this image or a previous image.
>
> I believe that this setting should be remembered a) during the session
> of editing an image; b) during all sessions editing all images; and c)
> between sessions of shutting down and restarting Gimp.
>
+1 on this; It jars me momentarily every time I open this dialog and
the setting is stuck to None instead of what I last selected.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] The Gimp is BIG now

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:34 AM, JamesGreen  wrote:
> I used Gimp back when it first came out and I use to know my way around it
> pretty well. Not anymore! I just got Gimp 2.6.8 and OMG...it has like 100x the
> feature set of the original! I'm lost and can't make it work. :(
>
> So, I thought that if I explain what I need to do maybe some of you could
> point me in the right direction.
>
> I'm trying to create an icon for my guild in an MMO. The icon must be exactly
> 20x20 pixels and no more than 57k bytes total. Easy enough. I want to use the
> head of an digital image I found, cut it out, create a mirror of it, then
> rotate it 45 degrees (so that I can get the largest image of the head as
> possible), and then paste it onto a 200x200 pink (255 R/0 G/ 255B) canvas. I
> will then reduce the image down to 20x20 and import it into the game. The pink
> layer will be transparent in the final in-game product.
>
> I think I can figure out how to rotate the 2nd, head, layer without
> disturbing the pink layer...But I'm having problems with creating the mirror
> image. Where is the mirror function in the menus? Is there a mirror function
> in Gimp?

You probably want one of the two 'flip' items in Image->Transform menu.
Or if you want to just mirror a single layer, Layer->Transform menu
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Is there a preference setting for this?

[David Gowers]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:57 AM, li...@saylor3d.com  wrote:
> Currently using Gimp 2.6.6 on Ubuntu 9.04.
>
> Until my latest upgrade, I was able select two images
> with my file viewer and then drag and drop these
> two image into gimp and get one window with each
> image as a separate layer.
>
> Now when I do this, gimp opens two windows with
> one image in each window.

It sounds like what has changed is what you do.

The first description sounds like what would happen if you first
opened the first image, then dropped the other image onto it.
To be clear, you would drop one image onto the depiction of Wilbur,
then drop the other onto the image window which has now appeared.

The second sounds like what would happen if you opened them each separately.
That is, dropping first one image, then the other onto Wilbur (in the toolbox)

Hope that helps.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Moving images from point a to b animated

[David Gowers]

On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Burnie West  wrote:
> On 02/19/2010 11:05 PM, Scott wrote:
>>> I don't see animation. Seems like the animation you've attempted
>>> should appear in the header1 image; but that's a jpg but not a gif.
>> Well it is my first atempt and I just did what the forum post that I was
>> going off of in a search said to do. Looked for a good tutorial for it but
>> couldn't find one.
>> Yes the train now that I think about it was a jpg. I just took one layer out
>> of an exsisting animation and made my own and saved as a gif. Any links to a
>> good tutorials for this?
>>
> I looked at a couple of tutorials for it, and they don't exactly seem to
> address
> your questions very well. They tend to be overly simplified, or assume
> too much
> background knowledge.
>
> WARNING: very wordy post (but I don't know how to help otherwise).
>
> Basically, you need to create a layer for each animation frame. Then you
> need to
> organize the layers in the animation sequence. Then you need to schedule
> them.

Or you use GIMP-GAP, which is designed for this kind of thing and has
the 'Move path' tool to do pretty much everything except extracting
the train :)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Can I Subtract a color overall?

[David Gowers]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:05 AM, John Mills  wrote:
> Thanks to Stefan, Dan, and David for your replies. I'll look into all three
> approaches, but this looks most directly like what I had in mind.
>
> My limited intuition seemed to suggest that since RGB is an additive color
> space, there might be a direct way to subtract a cast out of it.
If what I provided is not satisfactory,
you might want to try the inverse transformation (in which the values
go in the 'output maximum' field instead of the 'input maximum'
field.).I do think that the inverse transformation is better for
previewing how a given picture will look  on the colored paper than
actually preparing it for print.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Can I Subtract a color overall?

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:50 PM, John Mills  wrote:
> All -
>
> I don't know if this makes conceptual sense, but ...
>
> I am printing a scanned image onto a slightly toned surface (heavy
> watercolor paper), and I would like to precompensate somewhat for the
> effect of printing onto this warm toned medium. How can I correct the
> image before printing to approach the same colors as a print on white
> paper, at least in the darker areas?

I suggest trying this:

1. Create an image full of the color of the paper.
2. Look at the RGB values of the color you chose (my test color was
244, 242, 219)
3. Open up the 'Levels' tool. select Red channel, type the appropriate
value (eg 244) in the rightmost field under the 'input levels'
histogram+gradient. select green, type appropriate value (eg 242),
select blue, type appropriate value (219), OK.
4. The canvas should now be completely white #FF / 255, 255, 255,
and you should have an appropriate Levels preset stored to apply to
your pictures; you may want to save the preset permanently with the
'+' button next to the preset selector (after first selecting it)


Note:
This method will clip out detail of colors that are as bright or
brighter than the real paper color. This is basically unavoidable
according to your description of the problem.

HTH,
David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] gimp _scripts_ in languages other than scheme?

[David Gowers]

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Arian Sanusi  wrote:
> Owen schrieb:
 Hi,

 Is it possible to have gimp _scripts_ (not plug-ins) in other
 languages
 than scheme? Python p.ex.? When I place a python script in
 ~/.gimp-2.6/scripts the function is not accessible from the scheme
 interpreter. And I despair on scheme :S

>>> I think there may be some semantics with plug-ins and scripts,
>>>
>>> My view is that if it is written in a scrioting language, then it is a
>>> script.
>>>
>>> Just put them in your ~/gimp-2.6/plug-ins directory and make sure they
>>> are  made executable.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I apologize, I omitted to state that I am referring to Python scripts.
>>
>> Just make sure your gimp was compiled with python (should be)
>>
>>
> yes, it is, and python plug-ins do work, they appear in PDB and the
> menus. What's not working for me is putting a script in the scripts
> directory and invoke that functions from cli. Something like
>
> $ gimp -i -b '(python-fu-curve-ext "seagull_copy.jpg")' -b "(gimp-quit 0)"
>
> fails (from the interactive interpreter I get variable undefined) and i
> couldn't find anything on this on the net.

That's because it's wrong usage. scripts/ dir holds Script-Fu scripts;
that is the *only* kind of script it holds. Putting other types of
script in there is not intended to work in any meaningful sense, nor
does it.

In case it is not already clear, there is no functional difference
between a Python script (aka Python plugin) and a Script-fu script.
Both can register any number of PDB functions which are then usable
from any PDB-enabled interface (eg Script-Fu, Python, Ruby, Lua,
Perl,...)

Your python plugins/scripts should all go in the plugins directory.

Anyway, if you are working with Python, consider using the Python
console instead of the Script-fu console; it's at
Filters->Python-Fu->Console in the menus.

You might also be interested in the 'python-fu-eval' function, which
is useful for batch work.
You can specify python-fu-eval as the batch interpreter
("--batch-interpreter python-fu-eval"), and then -b arguments will be
treated as Python code to execute rather than Script-Fu code to
execute.
 I personally think this is much more comfortable way to do batch scripting.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Quick copy-pasting between Inkscape and GIMP

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Gino D  wrote:
> Hi.
>
>> I understand that this could just as well have been posted on the
>> Inkscape mailing list (if there is any) but I'm only a subscriber to
>> this one, so here goes nothing.
>>
>> I'm looking for a faster way to copy-paste things from Inkscape into
>> GIMP. My current procedure involves exporting the drawing from
>> Inkscape to PNG, then opening the PNG in GIMP and copy-pasting it into
>> the image I want to have it in. Is there any faster way?
>
>
> I've just noticed that, when you paste into GIMP any shape copied from
> Inkscape, such object is appended as new path rather than as new layer, and
> there seems to be no other possibility. However, once you exported an
> Inkscape object as a PNG file, a faster way to import this into a GIMP image
> is to select the special command ' File -> Open as Layers ' , through which
> you will be able to insert the PNG file as new layer along with its handy
> transparent background.

You should also be able to open the SVG file directly rather than
first exporting a PNG with that same 'Open as Layers' command.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Fwd: Re: GIMP vs Photoshop

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Programmer In Training
 wrote:
> On 1/19/2010 6:43 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>> On 1/20/10, Programmer In Training wrote:
>>
 itch I am scratching: I run Linux but hate to manage windows and/or
 workspaces, and single-window mode will fix this for me.
>>>
>>> I absolutely /hate/ the single window mode.
>>
>> You don't have to like single image node either. It'll be optional.
>>
>
> So the next update will see the ability to revert back to the old
> behavior? That will be nice. (:

What version are you using?
GIT HEAD (dd8b867852efccc00eda94244ef1f27dc1a145b7 as of this writing)
already has this option working, I just checked.
I think commit db2221c97d0532b2a558ba44fb80f2b4e39c2c0a (25 or so
commits earlier) was the first commit in which this switching was
non-buggy, but don't quote me on that.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Color Management Woes

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Frank Gore  wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:43 PM, David Gowers <00a...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We don't know if their formats are crazy.
>> But they certainly appear to be undocumented. Until they are
>> documented, or someone reverse-engineers them, we are unlikely to gain
>> support for them in open-source software.
>>
>> (OTOH, it could just be attached in the metadata. EXIF / IPTC support
>> is not complete yet.)
>
> ok... but why is Gimp assuming sRGB? Even if the color profile is
> attached in some bizarre non-standard manner, Gimp should detect NO
> color profile and ask me about it when I open the file. Isn't that how
> it's supposed to work? That's what other applications do, for example
> Digikam/showFoto.

Don't you think that would be very tiresome?
Most images have no ICC profile attached; in this case, sRGB is indeed
implied. Producing images that are not sRGB but have no ICC profile
attached is wrong (more precisely, it's a miscommunication, saying
that the image is sRGB when it's not. ).
I appreciate your situation of needing to correct the profile here,
OTOH, have you considered using tools like imagemagick and jpegicc to
detect the camera it came from and then attach an appropriate profile.
this would allow you to assign profiles automatically in large
batches. IMO this is much less painful all around.

BTW, I just checked the exif information on those JPEGs and both have
no EXIF information. So it does look indeed like the profile data is
stored in some custom format; there may even be no profile per se
stored, just a reference to or description of one.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Color Management Woes

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Frank Gore  wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Frank Gore  wrote:
>> As I mentioned, all the commercial applications I've tried had no
>> problems determining the appropriate color space for these files. It's
>> only open source tools that are unable to, including Gimp.
>>
>> So is this a bug? Or is Pentax really that crazy with their file
>> formats? They can't be that crazy if commercial applications have no
>> trouble with the files.
That's a fallacy, I'm afraid.

We don't know if their formats are crazy.
But they certainly appear to be undocumented. Until they are
documented, or someone reverse-engineers them, we are unlikely to gain
support for them in open-source software.

(OTOH, it could just be attached in the metadata. EXIF / IPTC support
is not complete yet.)

>
> Someone mentioned I should perhaps post examples of these files, and
> that's a fine idea. Wish I'd thought of it sooner. These were taken at
> seriously-reduced megapixels in the interest of file size. I figured
> the file format was more important than the quality of the picture.
>

> Here's one straight from my K-7, in Adobe RGB:
> http://picasaweb.google.ca/lh/photo/Wc8Lq42A20qRxDoTj1dNRQ?feat=directlink
>
> And here's another one in sRGB, taken immediately after the above:
> http://picasaweb.google.ca/lh/photo/c7_78WNLRXvEgHnmb6QM4g?feat=directlink

These could be quite helpful if someone is inclined to reverse
engineer it to spot the difference
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Color Management Woes

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Frank Gore  wrote:
> I've been pulling my hair out trying to figure out color management in Gimp.
>
> In the preferences, I clearly have "File Open Behaviour" set to "Ask
> what to do". My working profile is sRGB, and so is my Monitor profile.
> I have "Display rendering intent" set to "Relative colorimetric". Yet,
> everytime I open an image, Gimp never asks me what to do about the
> color profile. It always assumes sRGB, even if the embedded color
> profile is Adobe RGB or ProPhoto or whatever else. I always have to
> manually assign the right color profile after the file has been
> opened.
>
> Further, when I go to assign a color profile, I have to know in
> advance what the profile of that image was. Gimp doesn't tell me. It
> lets me change to whatever profile I want, but it won't let me know
> which one is embedded in the image.
Also.. does that mean that you go to the 'Color profile' section of
Image Properties and it says nothing / is blank?
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP and transparency

[David Gowers]

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Rick Duley  wrote:
> I've been poking around manuals and such in GIMP but I cannot find the
> magic word.
> I'm not a computer graphics geek - not by any standards - so I just
> refer to the functionality I need as "transparency".  I need a GIF
> file with a transparent background.  I assume GIMP can handle it, but
> would someone please tell me where the necessary information to do so
> is cloistered,
>
> Thanks

Owen's information is unrelated to what you want, assuming you mean
total transparency. (if you mean partial transparency, GIF doesn't
support it -- PNG does, though)

First, The layer must have an alpha channel. Right click on the layer
in the layers dialog and select 'add alpha channel'. If it's grayed
out, it already has an alpha channel.

Second, you must cut out the areas you want to be transparent. If you
are trying to do color-keying, the 'select by color' tool will
probably be helpful (followed by Edit->Clear to clear the area)

You can then export a GIF (or save one, depending on whether you are
using a new or old version of GIMP)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Image -> Flatten Image not available on newly created image with pasted in layer (floating selection)

[David Gowers]

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> GIMP 2.6.6 running on Ubuntu 8.04 "Hardy" Linux.
>
> Is this a bug?
>
> Should I post this on the developer list instead?
>
> Am I doing this incorrectly?
>
> At a minimum, I think there is some GUI confusion... at least it is not
> logical to my way of thinking.
>
> This is a little complicated, so please read through before jumping to
> assumptions.  Thank you.
>
>
> I need to make a new image that "looks" the same as an existing image.
> The reason for this is not important but I cannot use SaveAs because
> there is serious ICC profile corruption (it kills the plugin that
> attempts to assign sRGB profile) and I actually have to copy and paste
> the image into a new image to get a "clean" image.  So, for whatever
> inane reason, I need to make a new image with the visual contents of the
> old image.
>

Here's a suggested change to your procedure

> Procedure:
>
- Select all in old image

- Copy

- Set background color to black

- Edit->Paste as->New Image

- Image->Flatten Image (on the new image)

(That's the end of the process.)

> - At this point I want to flatten the image to a single layer with no
> selection.  However
>
>  1) Tool set to rectangular marque only acts as a Move tool.
>
>  2) Double clicking ON THE IMAGE has NO effect.
>
>  3) In the "New Image" process above, the window size created is the
> size of the image itself -- there is *NO* "outside the canvas"
> background visible.  HOWEVER, if I now drag the window larger so that I
> do have "outside the canvas" background area and double click in the
> "outside the canvas" area, it DOES anchor the image whereas double
> clicking on the image itself does not have an effect.

I can't comment on these issues as my WM doesn't inflict such issues upon me.
(I'm not saying GIMP doesn't have such a bug, just that I do not
suffer from the problems you describe.)

>
>    * I think that is either a bug or a poorly implemented feature *
>    * that the user is forced to drag the window larger, etc. *
>
>  4) ALTERNATIVELY, I can go to the menu and do "Layer, Anchor Layer".
> That works just fine.
>
>     *** BUT, PLEASE NOTE here it says "Layer".  It says nothing about
> anchoring a "Floating Selection".  There is an inconsistency in
> terminology.  If I am working with a "Floating Selection" I would first
> think to look in the Select menu items for an action to take.  Or
> perhaps the Image menu items (where Flatten Image is grayed out).

This is an ugly artefact of the way floating selections are
implemented, I think (in fact floating selections are the only type of
layer that can be anchored). We are aiming to get rid of them for
various reasons IIRC. There is progress towards this in 2.7.

Also, you can never flatten the image when there is a floating selection.
(I don't really think there's any good reason for this, but
developers, feel free to correct me!)

>
>  5) Furthermore, what I think I want to do is what I would call
> "Flatten" the image.  In the docs...
>
>     http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-image-flatten.html
>
>     it discusses the "Image, Flatten Image" command.  That is what I
> think I wanted to do all along.  (And in PhotoShop 5.x, that is exactly
> the terminology for what one would do in this case -- but I know this is
> Gimp, not PS.)
>
>     *** HOWEVER in this scenario, "Flatten Image" is grayed out and
> unavailable.
>
>     I do not know if, under the hood, making a floating selection merge
> into the background by anchoring a layer is all the same thing as
> flatten image, or if they are different tasks.

Flatten image effectively performs 'merge down' repeatedly on all
visible layers until only one visible layer remains, then discards
invisible layers and renders the layer atop the current BG color.

Anchoring a floating selection transfers its content to the underlying
layer (much like Merge Down)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Native Support for SVG

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Cédric Gémy  wrote:
>
> There is no non-sense that Inkscape supports some bitmap operations and
> also no nonsense that a bitmap applications support some vector
> possibilities simply because in many project, you simply need to mix
> vector and bitmap datas.
>
> a logo on a photo for example : and if the logo can be kept vector
> that's much better. if the photo don't need any modification, yo ucan
> simply load it into Inkscape (except that inkscape doesn't deal with
> import resolution), but in the other case, it will be more comfortable
> to open the vector logo in Gimp.

This is certainly true. I think this level of vector support is
something that will only come with a GEGL based fileformat, to make
the rendering and manipulation of objects more flexible.
For example, the vector-layers implementation generates pixels on a
layer, which is kind of incorrect -- a vector-layer is more like a
view on a particular vector object, not a layer with nominally static
content. The DAG-based architecture of GEGL should allow this kind of
operation to be represented in a much more sensible, and somewhat more
efficient, way.

>
> Anyway, gimp works on vector layers since a long time

Not exactly. Paths have been available for a long time; however vector
layers were implemented by Henk Boom a year or so ago but haven't been
merged into the main GIMP source tree yet.
So vector layers are not yet available.

>
> way. SVG import has been improved in the last realease and will go on.
>
> Just a question : text tool is a vector tool. Would you tell gimp don't
> need it ?

Being capable of vector operations (GIMP) is very different from being
fundamentally built around vector operations (Inkscape and the SVG
file format).
It's not that vector operations cannot be useful to GIMP, it's simply
that GIMP is orientated in the opposite direction, and because of this
difference, it requires great care when deciding whether to implement
further vector features.

There is a description of C++ "C++: an octopus made by nailing extra
legs onto a dog"
That is the kind of risk involved when you attach things so
fundamentally different to each other.
I think one of the reasons that vector layers haven't been merged yet
is this kind of issue -- the implementation can still seem a little
hackish and awkward from the user's point of view.

(of course, for all I know we'll end up using the GEGL vector renderer
along with a GEGL-oriented fileformat, which may render much of the
vector-layers code obsolete anyway)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Native Support for SVG

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Programmer In Training <
p...@joseph-a-nagy-jr.us> wrote:

> I was looking at the changelog for 2.7 and I still don't see GIMP moving
> any closer to supporting SVG (which is quickly becoming not-so-rare).
> I'd rather not have to go to another tool to create SVGs (I would like
> to move my website to exclusively using SVGs and only serving up PNGs to
> browsers that don't support SVG yet). The SVG Export tool does not work
> (I followed the directions to the "T" the last time I tried it and all
> it did was crash GIMP).
>

SVG is a vector format, not a raster format; GIMP is a raster image editor.
Why should GIMP support SVG export? At least, there seems no advantage in
using GIMP over using Inkscape to make SVGs, and many disadvantages.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Brush edit problem

[David Gowers]

On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 4:00 AM, Chris  wrote:
> I want to create a straight line that's two pixels wide. There's a brush
> that's 1px, and another that's 3px, so I created a new brush, made it a square
> one and selected a radius of 1.0px. If I do this, the brush appears to be 3px
> in width.
>
> So I tried various values. 0.7px radius still gives me a brush that is 3px
> wide. However, 0.6px radius gives me one that is 1px wide. I don't seem to be
> able to find any setting that makes it 2px wide, and neither can I understand
> the relationship between "radius" and the actual size of the brush. The same
> thing happens with higher values - anything from 0.7 up to 1.6 gives me a
> brush that's 3px wide, then at 1.7 it jumps to 5 pixels.
>
> Is it impossible to have a brush that is an even number of pixels wide, and
> if so, why?
No, but it may be impossible to have an even sized 'virtual' brush,
which is the type you're editing.
You may need to create a 2x2 grayscale image filled with black* and
save it with a 'gbr' extension to your brushes directory.(then refresh
the brushes dialog)

* or is it white? one of those two.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How to select whole layer and only layer

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Adam Majewski  wrote:
>
> Dnia Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:29:26 +1030
> David Gowers <00a...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
>
>> >  I would like to know how to make selection for whole layer
>> >  and only area of layer.
>> >  (should it be named "layer to selection"?)
>
>> It is, in fact, named 'alpha to selection', in the layers dialog. (or
>> in the layers->transparency menu)
>
>  almost...
>  if i have transparency somewhere on layer then i need to make
>  additional selection.
>  (color selection clicked on transparency area with shift(add))
>

It's possible to script this.
Basically, you can just
1. call gimp-drawable-offsets to find the top-left corner of the active layer
2. call gimp-drawable-height and gimp-drawable-width to get the size
of the layer
3. call gimp-rect-select using the bounds you just retrieved.

The procedure browser found in the help menu can help explain how these work.
Once you've written the script and registered the function in the
appropriate place, you can give it a keyboard shortcut using the
keyboard shortcut editor.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] what happened to layer folders layer masks?

[David Gowers]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Brett  wrote:
> I don't know if the developers planned it or decided to take it out. but in
> the earlier dev versions of gimp before the single widow mode XD, when layer
> folders was first introduced their was the ability to add a layer mask to that
> folder.. .. I know probably that it was unplanned feature because gimp treated
> the folders like a layers. but in the recent builds of gimp the ability to add
> a layer mask to the folder has been taken out taken out. *heart attack*
>
That's because it doesn't work correctly yet.

On GIMP commit df9e9e260990f827b40f9be05114897c571749a2,
the log message says:

Author: Michael Natterer 
Date:   Sat Sep 5 15:37:48 2009 +0200

Disable layer masks on group layers for the time being

Will enable it again when I fixed it properly, it's clearly a
non-trivial problem that needs some thinking. Disabled for now because
it causes crashes.


In short.. using that is risky and probably doesn't work quite the way
it should.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How to select whole layer and only layer

[David Gowers]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Adam Majewski  wrote:
>
>
>  Hi there!
>
>  I would like to know how to make selection for whole layer
>  and only area of layer.
>  (should it be named "layer to selection"?)
It is, in fact, named 'alpha to selection', in the layers dialog. (or
in the layers->transparency menu)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Bits per channel

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Ken Warner  wrote:
> Working with 16 bit per channel images will be great!
>
> 16 bits per channel is essential when working with high
> dynamic range (HDR) images.
>
> What is the timeline for 2.10/3.0?

I believe you'll find that you can only get a meaningful timeline for
eg. 2.10 after 2.8 is released.
Looking ahead further than 'the release we are currently working
towards' is unreliable, especially since all development on GIMP is
done by unpaid volunteers.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] WHat are my options, here

[David Gowers]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Noel Stoutenburg  wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I'm trying to figure the best way to use GIMP blend colors in a
> particular application.
>
> I have a topographical map, and I want to apply a color gradient which
> follows the contour lines of the map, and blends from a darker hue at

BTW: I don't know what 'a color gradient that follows the contour
lines' means, I could only guess.
If my advice is not suitable for what you mean, I suggest clarifying.

> the lower contour to a lighter hue at the next higher contour. The
> contour lines are not parallel. In the final image, I want a uniform
> darker hue right next to the contour line, and a uniform ligher hue at
> the higher one. A further complication is that the contours do not have
> a uniform direction. In one part of the image the gradient from 10 units
> to 20 units will be right to left, in another part of the image going
> from 10 units to 20 will go from left to right, and in still others, the
> contour representing 20 units will be a smaller irregular shape inside
> the larger, different, but still irregular shape representing an
> elevation of 10 units.
>
> I've thought of a number of ways to do this manually, for example,
> divide the map into different layers at the contour lines, and using the
> airbrush tool to overlay the colors; another is to leave the different
> contour levels in one layer, and use the smudge tool to blend across the
> contours. But are there filters of plug-ins which might automate at
> least part of the process?

The built in edge detection filters may help you in creating a
suitable selection to apply darkening to.

For the basic colorizing , I think you want the Gradient Map filter
(Colors->Map->Gradient Map)

Hope that helps
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] drop out background tutorial

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 7:02 AM, Bob Meetin  wrote:
> Subject says it all.  I have a large assortment of product pictures
> which I need to give uniform backgrounds, preferably white.  Can someone
> point me to a tutorial that discusses how?  You can see a representative
> sample image at: http://www.dottedi.biz/images/diagnostics/DSC_4355.JPG.
> They can probably live with the shadows if I can lose the bulk of the
> background.
>
> Thx, Bob

For this kind of thing, there is the name 'greenscreening', in which a
matte, contrasting color is used as a background for an object,
allowing the object to be easily separated from the background.

In that case, Foreground-select is ideal.
However, you basically have the opposite: A photo of a bluish-gray
object on a bluish-gray background. Naturally this is very hard to
separate automatically!
So for such pathological cases, paths is probably a better choice.

Smoothness is not a big deal (in fact the selection created by
foreground-select is entirely binary, no smoothing involved)... this
is because you can convert the selection to path and then that path
back to selection if you want it smoother.

If I needed to handle your example in the way you want, I would:
* use foreground-select to get a rough approximation (make sure that
there are no 'holes' by marking areas as foreground as needed)
* enter QuickMask mode (click the icon to the left of the scrollbar)
* select paintbrush with an appropriate brush and black color, paint
away the wrongly selected parts
* exit QuickMask mode (click the icon to the left of the scrollbar)
* Select->To Path
* Tweak the path if needed
* right click on the path in the Paths dialog -> 'Path to Selection'

If your example wasn't pathological (ie if it had a good contrasting
background), I would just use foreground select, convert to a path,
tweak the path, and convert it back to a selection.

Afterwards in either case, I'd probably just Select->Invert and fill
with white (like this: http://i26.tinypic.com/bdpjm0.jpg )
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Scaling and resolution

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Patrick Horgan  wrote:
> Jaime Seuma wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> This is an interesting question also to me.
>
> David Gowers wrote:
>
>
>
> No, if you turn off View->Dot for dot then the DPI relative to your
> display DPI is used to scale your view of the image.
>
>
> That much I had already found; but still, when I open a file that has
> been scaled only in resolution (for instance 300->700), still the
> different imageviewers display the same image.
>
>
> A 400 pixel wide image will always have exactly 400 pixels across, so on any
> given display device it will show the same irregardless of the resolution.
> On a 70dpi device it will be 5.71 inches wide, on a 90dpi device it will be
> 4.44 inches wide, on a 300dpi device it will be 1 1/3 in.
>
> If you set the dpi for the image to match the device you intend to show it
> on, then if, for example you change units on the bottom of the drawing
> window to inches, it will accurately report to you the sizes of things as
> you expect to display them.
>
> It won't make it display any differently though.
In GIMP (and Photoshop, and some other editing software)
it will make it display differently. If your display reports its size
correctly and Dot for Dot is off, the image will display at the
correct size, closely matching the original DPI (of course you do not
get any more actual dots out of this -- it just means that the
relative scale of things is correct).

It's easy to see this if you halve the DPI for one dimension (eg. so
DPI == 36x72) and then turn off Dot for Dot

> On a 300dpi device it will
> still display as 1 1/3 in, even if you set the resolution to 70dpi.

This is true for most simple 'viewing' software, which doesn't scale
the view to be accurate. Not for editors that try to be accurate, such
as GIMP.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Scaling and resolution

[David Gowers]

On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Michael J. M.  wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I experimented with the resolution settings in the gimp --> scale image
> menu.
>
> The resolution does not seem to have any effect on the rendering of the image
> on a computer screen.
>
> It has no effect on file size either.
>
> I checked this by scaling and saving the same image in 3 different
> resolutions
> (but no other changes):
>
> 72dpi, 300dpi, 600dpi.
>
> When opening them again all were rendered at the same size on the screen.
>
> I concluded that the dpi setting is only used by printers.
> Is this correct?

No, if you turn off View->Dot for dot then the DPI relative to your
display DPI is used to scale your view of the image.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] A "non-tool" selection...

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Ilya Zakharevich wrote:

> Why should *A USER* care how some #...@% *named* a tool?
>
> Why should *A USER* care what *another* user supposes is "a correct
> tool for the job"?  (Assume that the first user has considered the
> suggestion, appreciated the suggestion, and decided to discard it. ;-)
> [*]

They shouldn't necessarily, indeed, using a tool in new ways can be
very helpful and informative. However, when the program explicitly
states its purpose

http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/GIMP_UI_Redesign#product_vision

You will need to explain how your request is relevant to that vision
in order to have any likelihood of having your proposition accepted.

> P.S. [*] Myself, I do not use GIMP to CREATE graphics.  I use it to
>     fix existing images.
>
>     I'm a slow thinker; before I decide HOW would I want to fix a
>     particular photo, I investigate all the details I can think of.
>
>     So, while my *intent* is to "manipulate" an image, THE FIRST
>     things I always do are to use GIMP as a viewer.  It might be the
>     reason why I consider the default=panning-tool so useful.
>
>     Am I so special?  Do other edit-not-create people use different
>     workflow?
I just drag with the middle mouse button, or the stylus button, to
pan, myself. (or I use the navigation view (icon in the bottom right
corner of the image view)
If I mainly edited, rather than having a fairly even balance of edit
vs create, I would probably set the Zoom tool as the default (or
possibly the Measure tool).  I might even make the cursor keys scroll
the display rather than adjusting opacity etc.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Important menu options are missing

[David Gowers]

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Bill S. wrote:
> I'm using GIMP 2.6.6 that came with my Ubuntu 9.04 distro.   I've been trying
> to learn about GIMP.  I bought a book about GIMP for $45.  The book says there
> should be a menu item called DIALOGS in the FILE menu but my GIMP doesn't have
> the DIALOGS option.  The option is very essential, but I don't have it.  Also
> there should be a menu bar at the top of my toolbox but my GIMP has no menu
> bar there.  Also there is something called Script-Fu or maybe TinyScheme that
> is missing from my GIMP.   Probably many other things are missing but I don't
> know because I am not familiar enough.
>
> Is there some plug-in or upgrade package that will give me the menu option
> called DIALOGS in the FILE menu?  Has anybody here had these problems I
> described?

Yes, there is a downgrade package called 'Gimp 2.4'  that will give
you the obsolete menus you described.

Chances are, there is nothing missing; it just isn't where you expect it to be.

1. there is no script-fu menu any more (although there is a
'script-fu' submenu in the filters menu, which AFAIK contains just the
script-fu console). Script-fu now register in appropriate menu
locations according to their respective function -- for example logo
creation scripts are registered in File->Create->Logo, IIRC.
2. the Windows->Dockable Dialogs menu is probably what you actually
want when you talk about the DIALOGS menu.
3. various other rationalizations and reorganizations of the menu
structure have been done since your book was written.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] FG/BG color tool

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Carusoswi wrote:
> Sven:
> You're losing me.  I understand that, since I've opened that window, it now
> shows up when I go to Windows --> Recently Closed Docks.  But, if I haven't
> used that Dock, how would I pull it up from the Windows drop down menu?
> Sorry to be so dense.

Sven is talking about the 'Dockable Dialogs' submenu of the 'Windows'
menu AFAICS.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] What is the scale of Levels?

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Asif Lodhi wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Obviously, you're more concerned about the mailing list. I know about
> flame wars and never do that. I do 100% agree that I should have
> emailed him personally on his own email address instead of this list
> but it's really shocking to read your stern reply. Does the freedom to
> say what you want to say really mean that you can say _whatever_ you
> want???

no. You should not aim to offend people. That is different from simply
indicating what quote you find interesting or what your views are
(though I would argue that the latter is somewhat irrelevant to a
public mailing list).

Your offense in this matter is quite as absurd as my taking offense to
a passing man because he happens to be picking his nose as he passes.
I'm not the arbiter of absolute truth, nor are you; it is only through
free exchange of ideas that we human beings begin to grasp parts of
the true nature of reality. Not by taking gratuitous offense at each
other's ideas.

> And, that too on a public mailing list??? Is _that_ an
> etiquette ? Aren't you hurting the feelings of so many thousands on
> this list by posting such offensive language/quotes on a public
> mailing list? Now who is hurting who? Can't you really see that that
> very offensive quote can start many flame wars now and in future? It's
> not me - I am not flaming.

Your initial post was not flaming. Now however, you have definitely
passed over that line and *are* flaming (although you have certainly
managed to be subtle.).

My quote was an example of exactly the kind of content that tends to
cause flamewars; posting it on a public mailing list is inappropriate
IMO.
By contrast, Darxus' is not flame bait -- not at all.

> It's the quote.

The quote is a quote, not an assertion of absolute truth about
reality. Here's another one:

“A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will
lose both, and deserve neither” -- Thomas Jefferson

Hurt feelings are just hurt feelings. It's absolutely true that the
more freedoms people have, the more they get hurt; that's just a
simple matter of statistics -- the more things you can do, the more
ways there are to get hurt.
This does not justify reducing the number of things you can do; not in
any way; nor do hurt feelings equate directly to any kind of
non-trivial harm.

Politeness and civility is justified; political correctness, OTOH, is
sterile, stifling learning and the development of more nuanced ideas
about reality.

Hint: the above is my understanding only.

>
> I don't have anything personal against you or Darxus but posting such
> offensive quotes on a public mailing list is way too offensive and can
> really start way more than a flame war.

The quote I posted may be construed as offensive, as it is making an
assertion about reality (which no doubt you find offensive, much to
your detriment). The quote that Darxus has in his signature cannot
reasonably be construed as offensive -- it is a quote of a character
expressing a personal opinion about what kind of God he would find
acceptable. It's not an argument that you should follow that example,
or what *you* should find acceptable, nor is it an argument about what
the state of reality is. Finding such a quote 'offensive' is as
ridiculous as a Jew being offended at someone eating pork, or myself
(who is allergic to dairy and doesn't eat it) being offended at
someone drinking milk; It's disrespectful of people's choice to be
able to live their lives according to their own individual
understanding of life.

You can say 'please stop it' all you like -- I at least, will listen
only when you are asking me to stop doing something that honestly can
be objectively considered as something that clearly should be stopped.
I will never agree with stopping a practice simply because it *might*
cause harm; there must be a clear case that it *will* cause harm. This
has not been demonstrated (citing hurt feelings is *extremely*
unconvincing. Feelings are like the weather. And we are not here to
avoid hurting the feelings of people -- we are here to talk about
using GIMP, with a *reasonable*, not overweening, level of regard for
feelings.)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] What is the scale of Levels?

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Asif Lodhi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8/23/09, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>> "I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance." - Nietzsche
>
> Would you please stop using inappropriate language for God?

Nietzsche also wrote "God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_is_dead
No doubt you disagree with that (I do not, myself.). Regardless, the
topic that you brought up (and especially the way you brought it up;
you are not the arbiter of 'inappropriate language for God', nor does
the way you presented your *opinion* as if it were *factual* speak
well of your honesty.) is one that is commonly regarded as one that
should not be brought up, as a matter of etiquette, on a public
mailing list.

If the issue of another person putting particular quotes in their
email signature bothers you, I suggest you email them privately and
leave all mailing-lists out of it.
It's far less likely to result in a flame war than what you did do
(post to a public mailing list attempting to get Darxus to change his
behaviour on account of your *opinion*)

"
Flaming
Flaming is the practice of attacking people on a personal level.
While flaming is relatively common on the internet, almost everybody
will claim they're opposed to it. They may even flame you for having
flamed someone. It's all really confusing, actually.

However, there are some fairly obvious things. Responding to
someone's analysis of the deficit crisis by telling them that they
probably walk funny or weren't breast fed could easily classify as
flaming. Making rude comments about an individual's sexual organs or
religion would also probably classify.

Personally, I stick to a simple rule: **I say nothing about
anybody that I can not back up with facts. I do not comment about
people's religions, their eating habits, whether or not they smoke,
etc**. If I decide to comment about someone's level of intelligence, I
make sure I have good examples to support my comment. But even then, I
do this very rarely.
"
**emphasis** added by me.

http://songweaver.com/netiquette.html

and

"
If you should find yourself in a disagreement with one person, make
your responses to each other via mail rather than continue to send
messages to the list or the group. If you are debating a point on
which the group might have some interest, you may summarize for them
later. "

http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html (RFC 1855, the 'official' netiquette guide)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] What is the scale of Levels?

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 1:33 PM,  wrote:
> I'm looking for a mathematical definition of this scale.
>
> http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-tool-levels.html says 0 is black and 255 is
> white.  What's in between?  Is 7 double the brightness of 6?

Have you not experimented with it? 7 is nowhere near being double the
brightness of 6.

>
> What is the luminance / brightness of each of the levels?

luminance (n) = n (or n/255. if you want luminance on a 0..1 scale)
>
> Is it a logarithmic scale?

no.
It's a nominally linear scale, which is then modified by gamma
parameter (if gamma == 1.0, that's no change). 0..255 simply
correspond to sRGB pixel intensity values directly. So if you want a
truly linear measurement of intensity, you need to apply the inverse
of the sRGB curve.

scipy used to provide an implementation of that -- see
http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/scipy-svn/2007-February/000703.html
(rgbp2rgb function)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Levels tool with Layers

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Martin Nordholts wrote:
> On 08/12/2009 04:21 PM, David Gowers wrote:
> btw, martin nordholts is doing some great work
> on layer trees presently and in the last few months.. they are shaping
> up well.
>
> You are confusing me with another M.N.
>
> It is Michael Natterer that has been doing great work recently on preparing
> for layer groups

Oops! Sorry, Martin and Michael :)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Levels tool with Layers

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Gary Collins wrote:
> It seems to me that gimp works a bit differently from photoshop. In
> photoshop (actually, I'm still using 'elements-2', can you believe? Although
> I have got Richard Lynch's excellent "hidden power" installed which releases
> a lot more of the underlying photoshop 7 functionality - and the book was
> great for learning about image manipulation in general - but I digress...)
> In photoshop you can add an adjustment layer, which operates on the layer
> underneath it. And you can go on adding new adjustment layers, and then
> going back to earlier ones to "tweak" the parameters - so I might have a
> base image with a brightness/contrast adjustment layer above it and a
> hue/saturation layer above that. Both adjustment layers operate on the base
> layer, I can go back to the middle (in my eg, the brightness/contrast),
> tweak the parameters and view the result - with the effects of the upper
> hue/sat layer still applied.
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but it seems that in gimp I have to make a
> copy of the base layer and apply any adjustments to the copy; and repeat
> this for any new adjustment. This seems to be much less flexible, as
> subsequent changes to the middle layer would be obscured by the upper layer?

This is certainly true; all of your points are true.
This is being worked on.
However, the specific idea of 'effect layers' is regarded as severely
broken (basically cause it makes nonsense of the whole layers concept:
all layers have content, but oh! effect layers don't. all layers have
blending mode, but oops! effect layers don't. it's user-unfriendly in
this marked inconsistency.)
The implementation I believe we are currently aiming for is instead
oriented around the idea of being able to attach any number of effects
to a given layer group (btw, martin nordholts is doing some great work
on layer trees presently and in the last few months.. they are shaping
up well.)

>
> The photoshop method appears to be far more flexible. I was thinking that
> doing things this way might also have a beneficial effect on the file size,
> though judging by the size of photoshop format files, I doubt this is
> actually the case.
Photoshop format generally saves a lot of cached data -- for instance,
there is a thumbnail for each layer, and a composited version of the
image rendered at full size.

> But I tend to save as layered tiff with zip compression
> applied to the layers, which makes them much smaller and preserves much of
> the layer information (though things like selections won't be saved. But I
> can live with that).
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Please ,check this image

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Jay Smith  wrote:

> On 08/01/2009 08:37 AM, Martin Nordholts wrote:
> > On 08/01/2009 01:05 PM, photocomix wrote:
> >>   i never noticed a similar bug, even if i used Gimp to save as copy
>  thousands
> >> of jpeg, and i would never believed this possible, but i have to face
> >> evidence
> >>
> >> to the point image dimensions: 90x116 Size: 547KB
> >>
> >> And what is really weird is that seems impossible , re-saving from gimp
>  as
> >> jpg reduce the file size...even at quality 1 ( !!) i can't shrink it
> >
> > The JPEG has an embedded ICC color profile which GIMP ignores since it's
> > a CMYK profile, but it keeps it around anyway and writes it to the JPEG
> > if you resave it.
> >
> > To see the size of the attached color profile, first extract it:
> >
> >$ exiftool -icc_profile -b -w icc lightbulb.jpg
> >
> > Then look at how big it (and the image) is:
> >
> >$ du -hb lightbulb.*
> >
> > which gives the output
> >
> >557168  lightbulb.icc
> >560484  lightbulb.jpg
> >
> > / Martin
>
> Martin,
>
> Very "enlightening".
>
> In normal use of the program, how would the user known that there was
> such an embedded ICC color profile and thus to use the technique you
> outlined?


Alt+Enter (Image Properties) shows whether there is an ICC profile attached
(and what it describes itself as).
Perhaps it should also mention the size of the profile

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Can you help me understand this "wrong colormap" bug/problem?

[David Gowers]

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> Hi, everybody:
>
> I filed a bug about Gimp after some checking, it was declared INVALID
> and I was referred here to ask how to fix it.  I'm running Gimp 2.6.6
> on Ubuntu 9.04.
>
> I get bad results when saving images after Gimp converts the colormap.
>  Its described here:
>
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=567551
>
> The lcms author and Sven Neumann looked into it and concluded it is
> not a fault of the Gimp, but rather it is something wrong in the
> original image.  Images have Adobe1998 colormap embedded, but
> apparently that is a mistake.  I don't know how they can tell what the
> colormap is, and I don't understand why the original image looks fine
> in GQView but it does not look fine after editing in the Gimp.  If I
> bring the original image into Gimp and refuse Gimp's invitation to
> convert the colormap, and save the image, it is displayed fine in
> GQView.  But if Gimp resets the colormap in any way, the image looks
> bad.


That's because the original color profile incorrectly specifies the meaning
of the colors; garbage in, garbage out.


>
> I just don't get it.
>
> On a practical level, what is a user supposed to do?
>
> 1. How am I supposed to know if the wrong colormap is embedded in an image?
>
> 2. How can I follow Sven's advice to "unset" the colormap?  In Gimp
> menus, I find only tools to convert or set the colormap, but not to
> unset it.
>

First: you are not talking about colormaps (that is an entire different
issue, related to indexed images such as GIF. You are talking about ICC
color profiles.

1. Image Properties (ALT-Enter) has a tab devoted to describing the ICC
profile.

2.  I would guess you should try to assign the default sRGB profile to this
image -- as all 'dumb' (ICC-unaware) programs will display images as if they
are sRGB, because most monitors approximate sRGB.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] batches for web

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Patrick Horgan wrote:
> The truth is that Gimp displays to you using your screen resolution, so if
> you originally created an image at 72dpi and 216x216 pixels and another
> image at 4800dpi and 216x216 pixels, Gimp will display them the same.
Sort of true, see below..

> While
> they look the same, if you look at image properties with  or
> set the disply units to inches in the bottom border and move around the
> image, you can see the difference.  One is reported as 3" across and the
> other as .045" across.  The resolution is used by Gimp to translate to
> inches and inch derived units for you.
>
> If you go into image/resize, and only change the dpi, Gimp will report to
> you that the image is a different size in inches, but the pixels are not in
> any way changed.
>
> Various image file types like jpg and png store resolution and Gimp does
> store that for you.  Devices are supposed to scale the images so that on
> their display resolution they will appear the same size as in the images
> native resolution.  Some devices/software actually do this.

Like GIMP (toggle View->Dot for Dot off). When Dot for Dot is off,
GIMP displays the image at a scale matching the comparitive
resolutions of the screen and the image.

>  If you print
> something and it comes out the wrong size, some times you can open it in
> Gimp, change the resolution and resave.  The only change will be in the
> stored resolution, the file's image data is completely unchanged, yet it
> will now print a different size!
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Edit > Stroke Selection, Paint Tool=Paintbrush verses using the same Paintbrush Tool directly

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:41 PM, DJ wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> After creating a rectangle with the Rectangle Select Tool, rotating it
> -40 degrees, I selected Edit > Stroke Selection. I clicked the radio
> button next to "Stroke with a paint tool" and then Paintbrush in the
> "Paint tool" drop down.
>
> I then created a rectangle parallel to the one above using the "same"
> Paintbrush. I made no changes to the Paintbrush Tool Options. I
> created this rectangle freehand, clicking where the 4 corners would be
> while holding the shift key.
>
> Should the 2 painted rectangles look alike?

No. I understand your problem now.

The rectangle selection you made is constraining painting during the
stroking of the selection., just like any other selection would. If
you want the stroking to disregard the selection when applying paint,
you are better off converting the selection to a path then stroking
the path (with no selection active).

To illustrate -- use the paths tool to create a rectangle, and stroke
that path. The resultant stroking should display exactly the same
appearance as your freehand rectangle.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I get a smooth diagonal line

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:27 AM, DJ wrote:
> Hi David, gimp-users,
>
>> Are you looking for click, move to line end, shift-click??
>
> I can draw, or a better way to say it, I can create a line or
> selection for that matter -- the marching ants. I can technically
> create a line with the Pencil and Paint Brush.
>
> But, I can't make it look nice. I can't get the diagonal to look
> like the picture, so it just looks like another board. I can very
> clearly see the steps of the diagonal. If I enlarge the image the
> diagonal line looks similar to (assumes fixed font email):
>
>  ^
>      ^
>          ^

Even with paintbrush? (pencil tool does no 'smoothing', whereas most
other tools do by default)

If that is the case, it's possible your image is in INDEXED mode.
Check the Image->Mode menu and convert it to RGB before trying again,
if that is the case

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I get a smooth diagonal line

[David Gowers]

Are you looking for click, move to line end, shift-click??

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:48 AM, DJ wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> See the plain-old wooden fence at the top of this page.
> http://www.artsconnected.org/toolkit/encyc_linetypes.html
> Simply, right :-)  I wanted practice drawing lines, shapes, and
> coloring them.
>
> I created the vertical and horizontal with the Rectangle Select Tool
> and Select > Stroke Selection, Paint Tool set to Pencil Circle (01),
> Scale set to 2.
>
> To create the diagonal I still used the Rectangle Select Tool, then
> Rotate Tool, then Select > Stroke Selection. But the line is very
> jagged, and it looks different than the horizontal and vertical.
>
> I tried just using the Pencil, then the Paint brush (holding the Shift
> key to get a straight line). I changed to a fuzzy brush.
>
> How does one get a smooth diagonal line, like the one in the picture.
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> __
> DJ
>
>
> ___
> Gimp-user mailing list
> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>



-- 
The point of making mistakes is to make the best mistakes you can
make, and to keep making them to keep up your courage and keep
improving the quality of your mistakes.

There is a place and time for everything -- here and now!

I have a strict policy of interference.

"Just do one thing. Let go of everything else as you do that one thing
-- all your concerns and worries, hopes. fears and desires. This is
what leads to knowing what you are doing and what you want to do."
Misunderstandings are valuable.

You want to improve? Get busy failing! Attempt things you believe out
of your reach, until you learn how to reach them.

Treating your feelings as less important than what you know is only
the first step. The second, more challenging step is treating others
feelings as less important than what they know.

individuality is being the first value in your life, beyond your
feelings, others feelings, your or others convenience. You are the
star of your own life, there is no thing that can stand against
achieving your chosen path.

Nothing others do is particularly related to you; only what you do is
particularly related to you.

Your gratitude is what frees you to use your powers to the full.

Your powers have:
maximum capacity = 100%
commonly safe capacity = 90%
actual comfortable excellent regular pace capacity = 75%
so-called 'breakneck pace' capacity = 60%
other-perceived safe capacity = 45%
self-perceived safe capacity = 30%
typical usage = 20%
lazy/cowardly usage = 5%

Reason is no substitute for communication.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Print Quality Poorer than Word?

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:01 PM, bumpkin wrote:
>>bumpkin  wrote:
>>
>>> The graphics guy sent me our logo as a .jpg so I created a new file with
> the
>>> appropriate dimensions in the lasest GIMP for windows. I imported and
> scaled
>>> down the logo to the appropriate size and placed it at the top, finished
>>> adding the text, combined the layers and exported as a .tiff for the
> printer.
>>> The logo and text resolution on the print out was terrible... I tried
> printing
>>> it in the original GIMP format and as jpeg... same quality.
>>>
>>> I then tried created the same add in Word 2007 and the image and text
> quality
>>> was excellent :( I am a linux user and was rather frustrated and confused
> when
>>> Word produced better print quality than GIMP. Any explanation or help
> greatly
>>> appreciated. Thanks
>>
>>Your problem is obviously a problem of resolution, especially when you
>>compare a raster application like GIMP to a vectorial application like
>>Word. What were your "appropriate sizes"? I suspect you appreciated them
>>on your screen at 100 dpi, while your printer needs at least 300 dpi.
>>
>>Thanks for the reply. First I created a document to be the size of the
> entire quarter page ad, 3.75" by 4.75".
That size is only meaningful in the context of the dpi used.
at 100 dpi, that would be only 375x475 pixels, which is indeed very chunky.
Whereas at 300 dpi, it would be 1125x1425.

To be honest, it confuses me that you would use a raster editing
application like GIMP to perform a task that is essentially
vector-based, instead of choosing to use a vector-based application
like Inkscape or Scribus. Personally, I would use Inkscape for such a
task.
However, you can certainly achieve what you want with good quality in
GIMP, through applying improved understanding of the raster medium (eg
the meaning and use of dpi/ppi)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Setting Keyboard Shortcut for Windows > Dockable Dialogs?

[David Gowers]

Hi DJ,

On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 11:45 AM, DJ wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> I went to Edit > Keyboard Shortcuts and clicked on "Disabled" next to
> "Dialogs". The text changed to "New accelerator...".  I tried a couple
> of combinations and each time the text would change back to
> "Disabled".
This is normal: shortcuts can only be associated with menu items, not submenus.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Tool Options and finding a resource

[David Gowers]

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:06 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi David, GimpUsers,
> This definitely works in the Tools (list view), like Text Tool, Blend
> Tool, Paintbrush Tool. Nice! Just what I was looking for.
>
> But it doesn't work in the Dialogs, like Font Dialog, Gradients
> Dialog, Brushes Dialog.

"In the LIST VIEW". if you have it set to the tiled view, it won't work.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Tool Options and finding a resource

[David Gowers]

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:39 AM, Sven Neumann  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 18:44 -0500, DJ wrote:
>
>> Whether it's the Font on the Text Tool, or Brush on the Paint Tool, or
>> Pattern Fill on the Bucket Tool, scrolling through the lists is slow
>> and sensitive. I tried typing the first letter of font, brush, or
>> pattern in the list but that doesn't seem to work. I didn't precede it
>> with any alternate key (shift, ctrl, alt). What is the best (fastest
>> :-)) way to get to, or position yourself, to the resource?
>
> Press Ctrl-F (or Ctrl-S, it depends on your GTK+ keybindings) in the
> list view to open the search field, then enter the first letter(s).

I must say -- we need to promote this in the GIMP documentation!
(particularly in conjunction with the tagging functionality)
Personally, if I had known this, I would have hardly needed to wait
for tagging, as I'd already included categorization in the gradient +
pattern naming

David.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Tool Options and finding a resource

[David Gowers]

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 9:14 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> Whether it's the Font on the Text Tool, or Brush on the Paint Tool, or
> Pattern Fill on the Bucket Tool, scrolling through the lists is slow
> and sensitive. I tried typing the first letter of font, brush, or
> pattern in the list but that doesn't seem to work. I didn't precede it
> with any alternate key (shift, ctrl, alt). What is the best (fastest
> :-)) way to get to, or position yourself, to the resource?

Resource tagging is intended to address this problem.
Have you tried it? You can assign tags to any resource using the
bottom input field in the relevant dialog,
and filter by tags using the top input field in the relevant dialog.
(but not currently in the tool-options popup.. you must be using the
full dockable, eg. Gradients, Patterns, Brushes in order to use this.)

It would be great if we could do the normal keyboard-search thing for
resources, I agree!

>
> For example:
>
> Text Tool
> Click on Font Icon
> The active font is Arial and I want to get to Tahoma.
... why can't you simply use the scrollbar to get near to the right
place in a matter of 5 seconds?
I can.
I agree that the preview of fonts is comparitively sluggish VS eg.
gradients or patterns.
I think the previews should be calculated in idle time, so that
scrolling and selection can be instant.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Copy a "layer mask" from one layer to another layer?

[David Gowers]

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 9:01 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi David, gimp-users,
>
>>> Is it possible to copy a "layer mask" from one layer to another layer?
>> Yes, make it so that you are editing the layer mask on both, then
>> select all and Copy from one and Paste to the other.
>
> I was going to ask, "What if the layers are different images?", but I
> just tried it, and only the layer mask was copied/pasted.
>
> I just became aware of Edit > Buffer, and I see the layer mask in the
> Buffers Dialog too.  Do Gimp users use the Buffer a lot?  I seems like
> a nice little work area repository.

'the buffer'? Do you mean the Buffers mechanism and dialog (as opposed
to simple Copy/Paste)?

Not that I've ever heard of.
It's nice in theory, I think the need to name buffers impedes the
usability in practice.
A limited amount of numbered buffers that you may *optionally* name
seems more usable to me.

>
> I'm trying to think of all the various things I may want to copy.
> Paths and Channels comes to mind. I see on the Path Dialog, on the
> right-click, there is Copy Path and Paste Path. But there isn't
> something similar on the Channels Dialog. I'm still trying to get a
> stronger understanding of Paths and Channels, so maybe there wouldn't
> be a need to copy/paste a Channel.  But, if there were, how would you
> do it?
Just like any other drawable. Make it active (eg click on it in the
channels dialog), Copy, make the one you want to paste to active,
Paste.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Copy a "layer mask" from one layer to another layer?

[David Gowers]

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:13 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> Is it possible to copy a "layer mask" from one layer to another layer?
Yes, make it so that you are editing the layer mask on both, then
select all and Copy from one and Paste to the other.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I use measure tool in mm

[David Gowers]

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> Using Gimp 2.6.6 on Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy) Linux.
>
> I can't seem to figure out how to get the measure tool to show results
> in mm.
>
> So far the only way I have been able to figure out how to measure in mm
> is to: select the region I wish to measure, copy, create from clipboard,
> and then use one of the print size or scale dialogs and change the units
> in that dialog to mm.
>
> There has to be a better way.

It's a bit too late in the day for me to check here -- however, I
thought that the Measure tool typically used image units -- so if
that's set to mm, so should the measure tool give mm. I'm pretty sure
this happened for me with inches, it was quite annoying in my case.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Anyway to add multiple Guides at once?

[David Gowers]

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 1:04 PM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> Didn't see it in the manual, but was wondering if there is a
> short-cut to adding multiple Guides at once (ie., a comma-separated list)?

It seems difficult to imagine anything faster than the Gimp-python
console for this:


image = gimp.image_list()[0] # get the latest loaded image

for y in (10,20,60,80, 120, 140, 260, 280):
pdb.gimp_image_add_vguide (image, y)


It should be possible to make a Script-Fu which accepts a list of
coordinates (space separated) and does something similar to the loop
above.
However, I don't know how; I only know how to implement that in Python:

# assuming 'coords' is the string parameter containing space-separated
coordinates
realcoords = [int(v) for v in coords.split()]
for y in realcoords:
pdb.gimp_image_add_vguide (image, y)

Adding an option to choose between adding h and v guides should also be easy.


David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] change active tool from script

[David Gowers]

Hi Ryan,

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Ryan Krauss  wrote:
> I would like to be able to easily toggle between the Paintbrush with brush
> Circle (05) and an Eraser with brush Circle (17).  I want to write one
> script for each and bind them to keys I can use to make this switch
> quickly.   I have found the commands to set the brushes to either Circle
> (05) and Circle (17) and have written that part of each script and bound
> them to Alt-1 and Alt-2, so I can quickly change between the two brush
> radii, but I can't seem to find script fu commands to set the active tool to
> either Eraser or Paintbrush.  Is there a way to do that from a script?

No (and AFAICS, there will never be -- it has too much potential to
confuse the user and introduce race conditions.)
I was going to mention you could use xdotool to trigger the keyboard
shortcuts for Eraser or Paintbrush,
but actually you can't (not in Script-Fu; I always use Python to write
my GIMP plugins, and I can shell out to xdotool easily enough in
Python)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] More-... Wacom - What am I missing?

[David Gowers]

On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 PM, stephen moss  wrote:
>

Please indicate what brush you have selected (and the 'brush scale'
parameter in the tool options -- I *think* that was in GIMP 2.4).
It could easily be something as simple as having the brush scale
cranked down to invisible levels.
Alexia Death had fixed that bug by GIMP 2.6+ (or maybe that was me.
anyway she committed the patch), so if this is the problem, please
consider upgrading to the latest in the 2.6 series, it mostly keeps
you from having pointlessly small brush scale.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Are these bugs? Missing/duped menu mnemonics & non-working keystrokes (per menus)

[David Gowers]

A few corrections and additions:

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:36 AM, David Gowers <00a...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What the user means at that time is ambiguous. (access 'Units'? or
> something in the submenu?).
> Consequently, you need to press Enter first to confirm that you want
> to move into the submenu rather than access some other item on the
> same level.
Sorry Jay, what I said here is wrong. Right arrow, not Enter.

>>   This is really annoying because tomorrow I have to have a staff
>> member use this functionality 297 times.  Argh!
If your setup is stealing that key combination, remember you can
reassign it to something else using the 'Keyboard Shortcuts' dialog,
to resolve the conflict. IIRC most of the F-keys have nothing assigned
to them, you could probably use one of them.
Personally I might assign this to CTRL+SHIFT+Insert (although, note
that I have a 99% customized set of keyboard shortcuts, so I have eg.
Insert instead of CTRL+V, PageUp instead of CTRL+C, etc.)

> All keyboard shortcuts are accurate.
To clarify -- this is because they are shown based on the keyboard
accelerator map, which is exactly what determines which keyboard
events activate what actions.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Are these bugs? Missing/duped menu mnemonics & non-working keystrokes (per menus)

[David Gowers]

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> Using Gimp 2.6.6 on Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy) Linux.
> on K Desktop Environment 3.5.10
>
>
> I would like to check with others whether or not these issues are unique
> to me, my installation, or my desktop environment
>
> If they are bugs, I will report them or others are welcome to do so (but
> please tell me if you do).
>
>
> 1) Missing mnemonics on menus.  For example, under FILE, "Create" has no
> labeled mnemonic.

See my reply below to 2). Sometimes, there is just not the mnemonic
available. I believe that 'Save a _Copy' uses the mnemonic that could
otherwise be used for 'Create', and the developers judged that Save a
Copy would be used more often than the Create menu.
'e' might be available, though.

Please note that you could also press Alt+F, DOWN,RIGHT to enter the
Create submenu.

Also, if you use the Create submenu a lot, consider tearing it off
(rightclick in an image window, then leftclick on the dashed line at
the top of a submenu) and using it more directly.

>
>
> 2) Duplicated mnemonics on menus.  For example, under EDIT, the letter
> "p" is used ***THREE*** times, making it useless in a production
> environment.  As long as the same image is open, doing "ALT e p" cycles
> through the the three occurrences of the "p" mnemonic.  If it is the
> first time with the image, then it always goes to the first occurrence.
> Very obnoxious!

This is very hard to avoid, unfortunately.
The edit menu is large, and there are only 26 characters to use as
mnemonics (actually other characters like numerics and punctuation are
also possible, but usually not used.)
I managed to resolve most conflicts in my Lojban translation, however
Lojban has better distribution of letters (meaning that the name for
some particular action is more likely to contain a uniquely usable
character than eg. English). I have looked at this problem before, and
concluded that we would have to start using numbers and punctuation as
mnemonics in order to avoid significant conflicts. It is already
possible to do so, but GIMP avoids this,  as do most programs.

Keeping in mind that it is impossible to resolve all mnemonic
conflicts even in a small menu (due to plugins being able to add menu
items which can have mnemonics),  if you have a proposition which will
resolve most of the current conflicts in a reasonable way, even if
this is limited just to the File menu,  please enlighten us.


>
>
> 3) Misdirected mnemonics.  (This one may be a lack of understanding of
> menu mnemonics on my part.)  "ALT e p" [!!! may have to hit "p" multiple
> times to arrive at the correct desired location of PASTE AS] to get to
> PASTE AS.  This exposes the fly-out/sub-menu.  The sub-menu includes NEW
> IMAGE with a mnemonic of "n".  However, typing an "n" at this moment
> does not utilize the fly-out menu, it goes to UNITS on the main EDIT
> menu.  What is the point of having a mnemonic on the flyout/sub-menu if
> you can't access them without using the arrow keys to get into the
> flyout/sub-menu by which time you are focused on the desired item anyway
> and can just hit return.

What the user means at that time is ambiguous. (access 'Units'? or
something in the submenu?).
Consequently, you need to press Enter first to confirm that you want
to move into the submenu rather than access some other item on the
same level.

>
>
> 4) Non-functioning keystrokes / keyboard shortcut listed on the menus.
> Specifically for me at the moment, "CTRL SHIFT V" is supposed to create

CTRL+SHIFT+V, just to be clear. A single, chorded key combination.
If this is really not working for you, I do think there is a problem
with your installation (or your desktop environment -- see below).
The other 3 points you brought up are verifiable.

> a new file from the clipboard contents.  This set of keystrokes is
> stated in TWO places:
>
>   FILE, CREATE, FROM CLIPBOARD
> and
>   EDIT, PASTE AS, NEW IMAGE
>
>   Both should accomplish the same thing, but on my system, it does
> nothing at all.
>
>   This is really annoying because tomorrow I have to have a staff
> member use this functionality 297 times.  Argh!
>
>   (Yes, I know that as long as we use keystrokes to get to the menu, we
> can "walk" though it using the arrow keys.  It is just annoying.)

All keyboard shortcuts are accurate. If they don't work, chances are
you don't actually have something on the clipboard, or you have
another program (eg KDE) which is stealing that key combination and
preventing GIMP from catching it.

Personally, that combination works as expected for me; I just
Edit->Copied something, then pressed CTRL+SHIFT+V and a new image
window containing what I copied appeared.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] big noob question (text pixelized when using blend tool)

[David Gowers]

Hello Remy!

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Remy Damour  wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am quite new to gimp and have a big noob question.
> When I create a text using the text tool, everything is fine (text is
> created in color I want).
> But then, when I do : "right-click on text-layer" / "alpha to selection" and
> apply blend tool (with two colors), then text gets ugly and pixelized.
> You can see it right here: http://remydamour.com/gimp_issue.html

It looks like you might have the image in Indexed mode. Try converting
it to RGB (Image->Mode->RGB).

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] blur between images

[David Gowers]

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:57 PM, shay t.  wrote:
> hello i  want to create a texture for
> a 3d model
> so i took couple pictures of my face
> from different angels
> and i tried to blur where the images connects
> using clone tool
>
> i used the clone tool more then an hour
> and the result is not close to what i want
>
> my question is:
>
> is there is any way i can get result faster
Use Hugin to merge the images in a smart way. IMO there is no reason
to use GIMP to build the texture (except perhaps tiny cosmetic
touchups of the result of Hugin)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Help again, same old story.

[David Gowers]

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
> On Monday 04 May 2009, David Gowers wrote:
>>On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
>>> On Sunday 03 May 2009, David Gowers wrote:

BTW, the crop tool doc I pointed to is basically the same help you get
if you hover over Tools->Transform->Crop (or the toolbox icon of Crop,
presumably -- I removed all tools from my toolbox, thus I do not know)
and press Shift+F1 for context help.

Doing similarly for the Image->Autocrop menu item brings me to

file:///usr/share/gimp/2.0/help/en/plug-in-autocrop.html
(don't bother clicking on that, it's a local link.. although, it MAY
work in your system if your installation is similar enough)

Which also links to the Crop tool and Crop Layer command.

I literally never use that functionality myself, but it sounds like
you would benefit from knowing about Shift+F1. Just F1 by itself is
not context-sensitive. (there's also the menu item Help->Context help,
which looks up the help on some thing (which it waits for you to click
on)

>>>>On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Gene Heskett 
> wrote:
>>Autocrop crops the image automatically by detecting blank space
>>surrounding the image content.
>
> That I'd argue about as its fresh in my mind. Autocrop, when viewing the image
> I had moved to the top of the canvas in order to get rid of the blanked area
> above it, but that left about 2/5ths of the canvas at the bottom of the image
> blank, it having been selected and cut using what I thought was a crop
> function.

I agree that it can behave in a very confusing way when you have a
selection active. IMO it doesn't make sense to use it when a selection
is currently defined, we should either ignore the selection or bail
out saying 'this doesn't make any sort of sense to perform when there
is a selection. use Select->None and then rerun Autocrop, if that is
really what you meant'


>
> AutoCrop always reported there was nothing to crop, as did zealous crop.
>
>>Zealous crop does the same sort of thing, except for each individual
>>object in the image (one of the effects of this is that the spaces
>>between images are reduced. This is often handy for webpage authors.)
images? I meant "parts?" mini-images, maybe.

> When it doesn't dump that portion of the canvas with it, leaving blank canvas
> behind, taking up space in the image.  That to me is not a crop, its an erase.
> Even a 'cut' should take the canvas/paper with it, and a paste should add it
> back in.  But I realize too that that might be several times more difficult to
> code.

It seems to me that you are thinking in terms of an infinite canvas
(which is relatively unsurprising given the background you have).
However the canvas in GIMP is strictly finite, as is the case with
many painting and photo-editing programs. The new system in GEGL, that
is being integrated into GIMP, brings the possibility of support for
an infinite canvas (and I'm sure it will be discussed, when the time
comes).
However, such support would be strictly optional if implemented.
Why? Because the behaviour you describe (shrinking when cut, expanding
when pasting) is actually quite rude for a lot of usage patterns
(mainly if the image is going to end up on the web), where the
coherency of layouts depends on images remaining exactly the same
size.

Expanding for pasting is not automatic, but it's pretty easy to do manually:
1. Paste whatever you want, where you want.
2. Image->Fit canvas to Layers
3. Click the New Layer button to make a new layer out of the pasted content
4. Rightclick on that layer and select 'Merge Down'
(the above is only needed when pasting actually would expand the
canvas and you want it to.)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Help again, same old story.

[David Gowers]

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
> On Sunday 03 May 2009, David Gowers wrote:
>>On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
>>> Greetings;
>>>
>>> This, most simple of a photo manipulation has been hidden behind portable
>>> menu mumbo jumbo for a decade now, is it not possible to fix it for almost
>>> main menu access, just by drawing a box around what you want, invert the
>>> selection and anything outside the box is gone forever,
>>
>>I do this all the time, I just make my selection with rectangle select
>>and then use Image->Crop to selection.
>
> And I believe I tried that at one point in my 10,000 monkeys experimentation,
> and was left with a blank view, hello undo...
That means that you selected a very small area, I guess.
OTOH It's possible that you are actually encountering a bug. However,
given the amount of people, with no special knowledge of GIMP, who
manage to perform this task regularly with little trouble, I believe
that
the problem is with your understanding and/or attitude.

> my Bessler 23c/w/dichro head on up the rack and adjusting the easel to get
> exactly what I want, so automatically I wasn't even concious of doing it.
> That is why I find it so difficult to make gimp do it.

AFAIK the Crop tool works virtually identical to the kind of apparatus
you were using. Perhaps you enabled some option that makes it behave
in some way other than you expect (the 'current layer only' option (I
think -- I don't run GIMP in English) might qualify)

>
>>This also leads me to doubt whether you have done a reasonable amount
>>of research on this problem, especially as the first hit for Google
>>search "GIMP crop image to selection" includes instructions for
>>cropping using the Crop tool.
>
> I didn't.  Why should google have better instructions on running the gimp than
> its own help has?

Because as olivier says, you do not know what questions to ask. GIMP's
help is perfectly adequate, but clearly you were not able to help
yourself using it.
Otherwise you would have found and used this:

http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-tool-crop.html

>
>>In case it wasn't clear to you..
>>'Erasing part of the image'
>>does not in any way equate to 'reducing the area of the image'.
>>
>>David
>
> Ok, what does the autocrop and zealous crop function actually do then?  They
> do not obviously do this.  The erase functions should be labeled as erase, not
> crop, or some $5 equ prefixed *crop.  To this old darkroom techy, 'crop' means
The erase functions are named erase. The crop functions are named crop.

Autocrop crops the image automatically by detecting blank space
surrounding the image content.
Zealous crop does the same sort of thing, except for each individual
object in the image (one of the effects of this is that the spaces
between images are reduced. This is often handy for webpage authors.)
'Image->Crop to selection' crops all layers (and the image canvas) to
the selected area.
'Layer->Crop to selection' crops just the active layer to the selected area.
Crop tool reduces the area of the image (or just the active layer,
depending on what option is selected) to the size you choose.

The eraser (and Edit->Cut, Edit->Clear etc) removes content -- it
doesn't change the size of the 'paper',
just like the real world.


> So please don't call an 'erase' function a 'crop', its scattered all through
> the menus miss-labeled as a crop.  It is not.  It just adds fuel to the fire
> of frustration.

In what way does the above not match the meaning of crop?

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Help again, same old story.

[David Gowers]

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Gene Heskett  wrote:
> Greetings;
>
> This, most simple of a photo manipulation has been hidden behind portable menu
> mumbo jumbo for a decade now, is it not possible to fix it for almost main
> menu access, just by drawing a box around what you want, invert the selection
> and anything outside the box is gone forever,

I do this all the time, I just make my selection with rectangle select
and then use Image->Crop to selection.
It's possible to do it even quicker with the dedicated Crop tool.

or at least till its undone.
>
> Thanks guys, but please fix this most simple of photo editing function there
> is.
>
> You can see my problem at
> 

I can see your problem is that you are behaving in an arrogant and
demanding fashion.
This also leads me to doubt whether you have done a reasonable amount
of research on this problem, especially as the first hit for Google
search "GIMP crop image to selection" includes instructions for
cropping using the Crop tool.

In case it wasn't clear to you..
'Erasing part of the image'
does not in any way equate to 'reducing the area of the image'.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Some questions about installing GIMP Animation Package and GIMP Help on Windows workstations

[David Gowers]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:17 AM, Wilson, Francis  wrote:
> Thank-you for your reply to my request for help.  I read what you wrote and 
> followed the links.  As far as I can tell, there is no currently available 
> GIMP Animation Package for GIMP 2.6; nor do I find appropriate GIMP Help 
> files that I could install on the workstations.  Of course, there is always 
> on-line help.

That's somewhat true. I myself use GAP 2.4 with GIMP 2.6, and it works
okay for me.
AFAIK the package I linked is what you'd install to get this setup on
Windows systems.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Before I file a bug report

[David Gowers]

Hello Ernie,

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Ernie Wright  wrote:
> David Gowers wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Noel Stoutenburg  wrote:
>>>
>>> on my system (WIN XP Home SP3; Gimp 2.6.6) when I enter the "Alt +"
>>> code for a special character, nothing happens, that is, the character
>>> does not appear, and the cursor does not advance.
>>
>> Yes, this has never worked for me either (not only in GIMP, though --
>> in almost every application)
>
> Note that in order for this to work, you need to (1) HOLD DOWN the Alt
> key while entering the character code, and (2) enter the 0 digit at the
> start of the code.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Actually, in order for it to work, you must do absolutely nothing.
Because it does not work, in any variation including the above. It may
work on Windows or MacOSX, I don't know; I only know what the
behaviour in Linux is (Ubuntu 8.04 specifically). Maybe it's an option
you can enable somewhere.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Before I file a bug report

[David Gowers]

Hello,

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Noel Stoutenburg  wrote:
> Friends,
>
> In my normal work, I make use of a significant number of special
> characters, e.g. "é", "©", "—" [Alt-0233, Alt-0169, and Alt-0151
> respectively]. Despite the statement in the online documentation
> (specifically on page , in
> the box under "Font" labeled "Note", reading "You can get special
> characters in the same way as you get them in other text editors: "Alt +
> number keypad in windows), on my system (WIN XP Home SP3; Gimp 2.6.6)
> when I enter the "Alt +" code for a special character, nothing happens,
> that is, the character does not appear, and the cursor does not advance.
>
> Has anyone else run into this?
Yes, this has never worked for me either (not only in GIMP, though --
in almost every application)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Ctrl, Shift, Alt

[David Gowers]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 7:34 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> I was trying out Gimp's various Selections, and tools. Clicking on the
> Ctrl, Shift, and Alt keys, before a left-click and after a left-click,
> changes the Action.
Yes -- this is indicated by the tooltips when you hover over the
'replace'/'add'/'subtract'/'intersect' icons, as well as the

>
> Sometimes there is helpful text in the status bar at the bottom of the
> Image telling the user to try these keys. I find it helpful to have
> the specific Tool's options open too, because it may provide a visual
> indicator what these keys will do (i.e., highlight an option or
> check/uncheck a checkbox).
>
> I like this feature, and especially the text in the status bar. It's
> very helpful. It really pays, at the beginning, to move slowly, and
> read that text in the status bar after clicking.
>
> I was wondering, is it pretty much a given that all Tools support Ctrl,
> Shift, Alt, before and after a left-click?
No (although all selection tools do.).
For instance, most paint tools don't support Alt, since there is no
sensible action to map to this (whereas CTRL  = pick color or set
source location, SHIFT = draw line from last point)
Some tools support none of the modifiers at all, for the same reason.
(eg color tools like Curves, Levels, etc.)

> I did checkout the section "Keys and Mouse References" in the
> Documentation. And found the neat Quick Reference
> [http://docs.gimp.org/quickreference/]. Unless, I just missed it,
> none of these mention the mouse and these keys.

Yes. The ctrl/shift/alt behaviour is complex for some of the selection
tools, so doesn't easily fit in a quick reference. OTOH, the
ctrl/shift behaviour for paint tools is simple enough that it should
probably be in the quick reference.
In the main documentation, these actually are documented -- see

http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-tools-selection.html#gimp-tool-select

If you think this could be made more obvious or accessible, I
encourage you to contribute to the documentation project (see
http://docs.gimp.org/help.html )

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I avoid error message _windows_ when opening tif files created in Photoshop? (MaxSampleValue, MinSampleValue)

[David Gowers]

Hi Jay,

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> On 04/23/2009 10:04 AM, David Gowers wrote:
>> Have you tried creating an 'Error Console' dockable?
>> It normally catches such messages which would otherwise cause popups.
>>
>> David
>
> Thanks David,
>
> That did the trick.  But...
>
> a) Now I have yet another window on my desktop whenever I run Gimp.  Is
> there any way to "hide" it?
Why would you have another window? You know.. Dockables are called
that because you can dock them :) Surely you already had some attached
to your toolbox? Personally I have only two windows on my desktop, the
image window and the toolbox (with lots of dockables attached). I'm
not sure why you would have a multiplicity of windows if you could
avoid it.

>
> b) Is there any way to simply tell gimp to ignore these particular error
> messages?
No (short of editing the source and recompiling)
>
> c) Are these really proper error messages?  What exactly is it
> complaining about and why?  Are the files that Photoshop created
> defective in some way?  Or have the standards changed?

I don't know *exactly* what it is talking about, but, according to
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=U&start=1&q=http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/tiff/TIFF6.pdf&ei=zRrxSaSVBJX0tAOT_-D3Cg&usg=AFQjCNFrxJb-bxA-_MzplqUU6YfaAwtVIw
, MinSampleValue and MaxSampleValue are only to be used for
statistical purposes and not to effect display or print in any way --
so I am guessing that warnings rather than errors should be given.

I think it's quite possible that PS is creating defective files, as
that part of the TIFF spec seems ill-defined. I don't really
understand why GIMP is expecting 3; Intuitively I would expect it to
expect 1. It's possible that this is a GIMP bug caused by copy+paste
(probably from the code to handle MaxSampleValue, where in my limited
understanding, expecting 3 is often sensible.)

In any case, I recommend you file a bug report about it (
http://www.gimp.org/bugs )

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I avoid error message _windows_ when opening tif files created in Photoshop? (MaxSampleValue, MinSampleValue)

[David Gowers]

Hi Jay,

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> I am using Gimp 2.6.6 on Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy) Linux.
...
>
> How can I tell Gimp to suppress reporting such errors and/or direct all
> such errors to stderr instead of Gimp opening up a "GIMP Message" window
> that has to be dismissed every darn time I open one of these old image
> files?
>
> Also, a minor irritant: The "GIMP Message" window is not shown in the
> various lists of windows in my desktop's task bar.  My desktop is KDE
> 3.5.10.  Thus if I don't dismiss each such window as they come up, they
> end up hanging around under other windows and one could easily end up
> with lots and lots of them present.  And I can't get at them by using
> the task bar lists.
Have you tried creating an 'Error Console' dockable?
It normally catches such messages which would otherwise cause popups.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Two Gimp environment questions

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Alchemie foto\grafiche
 wrote:
>
>>Regarding, "concept 2 clones may kill each other", I'm
>> working under
>> the assumption, that the order of the directories in the
>> Edit /
>> Preferences / Folders, determines which script or plug-in
>> is used. The
>> 2 arrows at the top of the panel change the order.
>
> Not exactly and is not only a problem for clones even if happen much more 
> seldom in other cases
>
> I always fail to explain it with the right words i hope other may do better
> I try again but the technical term may be not exact:
> Basically there are parameters assigned to each script, when 2 or more script 
> use the same name of a already assigned parameter trouble  happen.

The problem occurs when two or more scripts define and register a
function with the exact same name.
AFAIK the parameters of the functions do not effect this problem; and
scripts themselves cannot have parameters, only the functions they
define.
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Two Gimp environment questions

[David Gowers]

Hi DJ,

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:51 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> * One *
>
> I was just trying things out and noticed some errors when I start Gimp
> from the Linux command line.  They don't seem to be causing any
> problems, but I was wondering if anyone knew what they were.
>
> If I take one for example, "/././.gimp-2.6/patterns/". This directory
> is in Gimp's Preferences.  I see the patterns in the Pattern Dialog. I
> can open up the patterns from Gimp's File Dialog. So why the "fail to
> load"? HHMmm... :-)
>
> * Messages *
> GIMP-Error: Failed to load data:
> Image file '/././.gimp-2.6/patterns/extras' contains no data
>
> GIMP-Error: Failed to load data:
> Fatal parse error in palette file '/././.gimp-2.6/palettes/gps': Read
> error in line 1.
>
> GIMP-Error: Failed to load data:
> Fatal parse error in gradient file '/././.gimp-2.6/gradients/web2.0':
> Read error in line 1

What this means is that, opening a directory as if it is a file will
not yield sensible results, and naturally these directories do not
make sense when you try to read them as if they were gradient files :)

> * Two *
>
> Awhile back, I installed the FX-Foundry. I was looking at the Gimp
> Registry and noticed there seemed to be some duplication. For example,
> Quick Sketch.
>
> In FX-Foundry, the name is: phillips-quick-sketch.scm
> Last update according to internal comments: 9/9/2007
>
> In Gimp-Registry, the name is: quick-sketch_0.scm
> Last update according to internal comments: 2/9/2009
> The changes made by a different person than the originator.
>
> Should I expect to see duplication between FX-Foundry and the Gimp
> Registry? The Gimp Registry is the "official" add-on location,
> correct?

Fx Foundry is itself available on the GIMP Registry, so.. I'm not sure
what else to say...
FX Foundry is a collection of scripts, some of which were sourced from
the GIMP Registry; some of them have been updated to be compatible
with GIMP 2.6 as needed. If you believe that the FX-Foundry version is
out of date, consider mailing the creator of FX-Foundry about this.

I have looked at it myself, and it appears that certain aspects of the
registry version are improved on the FX-Foundry version. In
particular, the registry version, rather than converting the image to
grayscale, only desaturates the current layer. So it might be worth
mentioning this to the maintainer, Alexia Death
(though she may see this anyway :) I know she's subscribed to the
gimp-developer ML, not sure about the gimp-user ML)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Some questions about installing GIMP Animation Package and GIMP Help on Windows workstations

[David Gowers]

Hi Francis,

On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Wilson, Francis  wrote:
> I am a computer teacher at a public high school in Sylmar, California, and a 
> long time open source enthusiast.  I have downloaded and installed GIMP 2.6.4 
> on the 32 Windows XP workstations in my computer lab.  I have also downloaded 
> gimp-gap-2.4.0.tar.bz2 and gimp-help-2.4.2.tar.bz2 to my administrative 
> Windows XP computer; I uncompressed both these files. producing 
> GIMPAnimationPackage and GIMPHelp folders folders respectively.  Both of 
> these folders contain a file called "install", but both talk about shell 
> scripts which are appropriate to Unix or Linux.
>
> How do I install the animation package and the help files to Windows 
> computers?

First, you download the right files.
gimp-gap-2.4.0.tar.bz2 is almost certainly a source code distribution,
not binaries. Probably both of the files you downloaded are unsuitable
for your architecture.

For GIMP-GAP, you probably want the file linked to here:
http://www.gimptalk.com/forum/topic/Gimp-gap-2-4-0-For-Windows-28692-1.html

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] sane

[David Gowers]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 9:06 PM, David Miller  wrote:
> My File Create menu has, From Clipboard, Screenshot, Buttons, Logos,
> Patterns, and Web Page Themes.  I still don't see anything about acquire.
> David

That just means you don't have a version of the XSane plugin installed
that is appropriate for 2.6.x.
(this is easy to verify -- the plugin browser in the Help menu allows
you to search by name, and shows where in the menu something shows up.
searching 'sane' will probably bring up nothing)

Chris Mohler's suggestion is good. Personally I would recompile it
myself (I recompile all these types of things myself just so I can be
sure I know what I'm getting :)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] sane

[David Gowers]

Hi David!

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 9:17 PM, David Miller  wrote:
> I have used the gimp, very lightly, for many years, starting back with
> about Redhat 3.
> With every install or upgrade the acquire has always been in the menu.
> I upgraded from Fedora 7 to Fedora 9 recently and that upgraded the gimp
> to 2.6. I have checked every where I know to check and can't find an
> acquire button.
> Why would it be removed?

Restructuring of menus caused this. What you want, is the File->Create menu.
Hope that helps!

David (hehe :)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Nice features

[David Gowers]

Hi DJ,

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:47 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
> Two nice features
> -
>
> These may be simple features, but they sure are nice. The first is the
> zoom image icon in the upper right-hand corner of the image window.
> I use to hit equal, minus, and 1 multiple times to resize the image
> and then I'd have to grab the lower right-hand corner. But with the
> zoom image set, now I just grab the corner and the image automatically
> resizes. Nice :-)

Oh, I'd forgotten about this :) To clarify, what it actually does is
toggle whether the image zoom automatically changes to fit the image
in the window as you resize the window.
(personally I never use this, because all image windows are always the
same size for me (left 70% of horizontal screen space, lower 96% of
vertical screen space) and I do no window resizing.)
It might be good for additional floating image windows, eg. reference
pictures when I'm drawing, though.

>
> The other feature is keyboard shortcuts.  I doubled checked the keys
>  already set, Edit -> Keyboard Shortcuts, because I don't want to make
>  my Gimp environment too "non-standard".  I found a couple keys that were
>  convenient for my use and not currently used. Now, if I find myself
>  doing something repetitive, I select the menu item, and click the
>  key, and it's set.
>  http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-concepts-shortcuts.html

For that particular usage (where your repetitive tasks may only relate
to your current GIMP session, rather than occurring across multiple
sessions), you may want to consider using 'Dynamic keyboard
shortcuts', which are suited to very quick assignment (this is an
option in Preferences->Interface. The most reliable way to use it is
to enable it, assign some shortcuts, then disable it immediately
afterwards.)


> Do the tear-away menus still exist?  I didn't use them a lot when I
> first read about them a while back, but I remember that there were
> suppose to be a dashed line on sub-menus, and you'd grabbed them and
> the menu would tear away. I used it a little bit, but something came
> up and I wanted to revisit that, and I don't see the dashed lines any
> more at the top of sub-menus.
> http://docs.gimp.org/en/menus.html#detachable-submenus

This depends on your GTK+ settings -- if you're using GNOME, it often
likes to explicitly disable tearoffs; also, the rightclick menu can be
different from the menubar in this aspect -- my menubars have no
tearoffs, my right-click menu does have tearoffs.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Alpha channel and pixel transparency value

[David Gowers]

Hi DJ,

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:28 AM, DJ  wrote:
> It may not appear like it, but yeh.  Sorry.
>
> I'm hitting PF1 all the time to get specific doc too.
>
> I do a google site search for terms too.
>
> I didn't quite know what you meant by "Cursor" dockable. So I checked
>  Windows -> Dockable Dialogs, and didn't see that terminology. A friend

Eh, maybe it is called 'Pointer' dockable. I don't use GIMP in the
English language, but Lojban.
The menu item in question appears after Undo History and before Sample
Points in the menu.

http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-windows-show-dock.html
http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-pointer-info-dialog.html

I noticed that pressing Shift+F1 over the 'Pointer' menu item only
gives the 'EEK! Missing help' page. This is probably a bug in the
docs, since the relevant page does actually exist.

>  I scrolled across the image. That checkbox option eluded me...

Such an option is not available in GIMP. If you would like it, I
suggest making a mockup and submitting it to
gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com.
However, the Pointer dockable works fine for me for this purpose, on
the rare occasions I need it.

Do you have a good reason for replying only to me rather than the
list? It makes the thread on the mailing list appear disjointed.
Here, I use 'Reply to All' to reply to messages from mailing lists,
and this is effective.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Alpha channel and pixel transparency value

[David Gowers]

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 9:50 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi Gimp-user,
>
>
> I'd like to know the transparency value of a pixel in Gimp. In PSP,
> when you run the cursor over a pixel it'll tell you the RGB and the
> alpha percentage.  Can I get this information in Gimp?

Have you looked at docs.gimp.org to find out the answer to some of
these questions?

Anyway, the 'Cursor' dockable does this.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Moving and Resizing an existing Path

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:05 AM, DJ  wrote:
>
> Paths to Selection and Stroking that Selection:
>
> I have 3 paths and I clicked "Path to Selection" while holding down
> the shift key. All 3 paths are now one selection. I want to outline
> this selection, so I go to "Edit - Stroke Selection". But only the
> last path I added to the Selection gets stroked.

In that case, why do you believe that the paths were added to the
selection rather than replacing it?
Shift+Clicking on menu items has no special meaning. All you did was
1. replace the selection with the shape of the first path
2. replace the selection with the shape of the second path
3. replace the selection with the shape of the third path

> I can do each one
> individually, but the project would go quicker if all 3 paths turned
> into a selection would get stroked.  Am I missing something or is
> there a better way to do this.

There are at least 2 ways to do this:
1. Use 'Add to selection' in the Paths dialog, rather than anything
else, to add them all together one at a time
2. Set a group of them visible, and use 'Merge visible paths'. Note
that this may produce different results to the above, depending on
exactly what behaviour you were expecting.

Experiment, see which one is appropriate.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Moving and Resizing an existing Path

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 8:09 AM, DJ  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an XCF file with saved Paths. I want to move the Paths.
>
> I see on the Move Dialog an option, Path. But, it's a little difficult
> determining what I'm moving. Is there a way to make the actual Path
> visible while moving? I do see the rectangular box, when I click.

Why don't you make the actual path visible in the paths dialog, the
same way you would make a layer visible?
Though I admit, GIMP should probably make any item we are transforming
temporarily visible.

>
> Also, is there a way to resize a saved Path? I did "Path to Selection"
> again, and I was looking for resize handles, like when using the
> Rectangle Selection Tool.  I'd rather resized the Path, rather than
> the Selection, but at the moment I can't do either. :-)

Use the Scale tool; all the transform tools have the same options
regarding what they effect.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Paths Tool Problem

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 12:10 PM, City Ranch  wrote:
> Version:1.0 StartHTML:000168 EndHTML:002241 StartFragment:000471
> EndFragment:002224
>
> gimp 2.6.6
>
> Laptop
>
> Windows Vista Home Premium Service Pack 1 (build 6001)
>
> 1.60 gigahertz Intel Core Duo
> 64 kilobyte primary memory cache
> 1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache
>
> I use the Navigation window to enlarge and move around image while using the
> Paths Tool.
>
> No matter the size of the photo in height and width and kb I end up with the
> same problem when I am finished outlining an image in the photo. When I
> double click on my first anchor for the marching ants I get a double line
> from the left to the right side in the middle of the image. This double line
> can be a small as eight pixels wide to as much as two thirds of the image.
I  suspect this is a misunderstanding on your part of the mechanics of
paths. A few screenshots would help a lot if you could do that?

>
> If I outline using the Paths Tool two people standing together taking up
> most of the frame I will get the double line usually from the right elbow of
> the person standing on your left to the left hip of the person standing on
> your right. This double line can take out any where from the chest to the
> knees of the people or a thin line from elbow to hip.
I presume the area in question is the area of overlap between those two paths.
This is normal -- it is in fact the same mechanic that allows you to
have, say, a hollow circle.

If it's not what you want, I suggest exporting to Inkscape and using
the Union operator to make a path that is the union of those paths.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] On Close, the Save / Don't Save dialog is not paying attention to keyboard

[David Gowers]

Hi Jay,

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> But... I am not sure we are speaking of the same behavior / application.
>
> I _am_ speaking of the pneumonics in dialogs that open as the result of
> some action.
Your pneumonics amuse me. They are mnemonics.

>
> I am _not_ speaking of accessing the main menus of programs (for which
> you _do_ need to use the ALT key).

I know. You were quite clear before, and I was not at all confused
about what you meant.

>
> Every Windows program I have ever used, from Win311 to Win95* to Win98*
> to WinME* to W2Kpro* to WinXPpro* [The * o/s are currently installed and
> available to me in virtualized form for testing and verification] did as
> I expect they DO accept the use of single letter pneumonics in those
> types of dialogs.  The same has been true for RedHat Linux and SCO
> Unixware that I have used.
>
> I have only a few months of using Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy) Linux / KDE , it
> also seems to be true there and in the program I am using right now,
> Thunderbird Mail, it is true.  This is on the very same system on which
> I am using Gimp.

Well, perhaps this is a configurable aspect to GTK ( I don't remember
very much about RHL but I'd guess some of the apps would be GTK+
based)

If so, I'd be interested to try this behaviour.

(the other option -- more likely to my mind -- is that the RHL guys
patched the GUI libraries to change this behaviour)

>
> (If I try to close the message I am currently writing without first
> saving it, it will present a dialog and allow me to use single character
> pnuemonics without having to use the ALT key -- except that of the three
> choices, only two of them have pneumonics; a bug I need to report.)
>
> What does your Gimp do and what are you running it on?

I'm using Ubuntu 8.04 myself (no desktop environment -- ie. not Gnome
or KDE or even XFCE, just the window manager 'awesome')
What my GIMP does has already been addressed in a previous mail.
In case there was any lack of clarity, ALT+ is the only way I
can activate mnemonics. This is true for almost all apps I've tried,
not just GTK+ apps.
The exceptions are applications like Grafx2, which completely
implement their own GUI system.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Snap to Guides by default

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 9:52 PM, malefico  wrote:
> Hi, two rather noob questions here:
>
> I wonder if there is any way to turn off the "Snap to Guides" option
> which is on by default (Gimp 2.4), I look in configuration windows but
> couldn't find how to turn it off.

is

View->Snap to guides

what you want?
(in the menus on the image windows, not in GIMP preferences)

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] On Close, the Save / Don't Save dialog is not paying attention to keyboard

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> Using Gimp 2.6.6 on Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy) Linux.
>
> If I have a newly created "untitled" image and I Close it, I naturally,
> and correctly, get a dialog asking me if I wish to save it or not save it.
>
> In that dialog, pneumonic letters are underlined, meaning that I
> _should_ simply be able to type that letter and the action will be taken
> -- at least that is the way it would work on Windows (but I don't have
> Gimp on Windows).
>
> I _can_ access those pneumonics if I do an ALT first, as one would
> normally do when using pneumonics to get to menus.  However, I think I
> should be able to simply type the single pneumonic/letter that is
> underlined.

I have to say that I don't recall ever encountering such a behaviour on Windows.
I've always had to use ALT both on Windows and Linux, that I recall.

>
> a) Is this behavior (that I can't just type the letter, I have to also
> hit the ALT key) correct for this type of dialog box?

See below.
Also, I think a decision was made against this kind of behaviour as it
can make it quite easy to accidentally choose one of these options (if
eg. you think you're typing in IRC but actually your gimp 'Close
images' dialog is focused). I remember tripping over this in old DOS
programs.

>
> b) Is this the way Gimp acts in Windows?
Yes, as far as I know.

>
> c) Is this "problem" an Ubuntu / KDE standard way of doing things (or a
> known problem)?

GTK+ standard way of doing things, AFAIK.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] pixels to dpi

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> David,
>
> Thanks for that clarification.
>
> I made the mistake of thinking of how I do it in Photoshop which has a
> single "resize image" dialog where things are not so neatly divided as
> they are in Gimp.  In Gimp there is a "Print Size" dialog.  My bad.

Hmm, maybe this needs clarification too:

The 'print size' dialog is one way to change image resolution in GIMP
(which I discovered thanks to your mentioning it!).
The other way, which I have always used myself,
to change DPI is by using the Scale Image dialog.

(I think what you were suggesting could be done using the Scale Image dialog.)

I understand why Photoshop's resize image dialog might require two
actions (it looks like allowing 'size in inches' and 'dpi' to disagree
allows Photoshop to mediate actual printed DPI to best compromise
between the two.)
If Photoshop really requires you to do both of those steps rather than
just changing resolution, I wonder whether there is some other dialog
better for your purposes that does only require the resolution change.
I certainly hope other software like PSP manages to auto-update inch
sizes, though :)

I actually prefer the Print Size dialog now, cause it's simpler for
the purpose of tweaking dpi:)
(of course I never make prints -- I just use this to alter the way the
image is displayed :)
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Masking for Contrast Control - Can this be done inGimp?

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Fatbob  wrote:
> Gimp newbie here.
>
> How do you enter QMask mode?

"the left-bottom button in the image window"

http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-using-quickmask.html
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] pixels to dpi

[David Gowers]

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Jay Smith  wrote:
> Norman,
>
> So, to scan that postage stamp that you want to turn into a wall poster,
> you might scan it at a very high 2400 x 2400 resolution.  Then, in your
> image program, change the size from 1x1-inch up to 20x20 inches AT THE
> VERY  SAME TIME AS YOU _reduce_ the resolution to 300x300 dots/pixels

Just to clarify: This is unnecessary. If you want to blow up
something, just reduce the resolution. Halving the resolution is all
that would be required to turn a 600x600 (1 inch square) 600dpi image
into a 600x600 (2 inch square) 300dpi image.
The inches measurement should automatically update itself, since it's
dependent on image resolution.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] select shadows

[David Gowers]

Hi norman,

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 12:15 AM, norman  wrote:
> I know how to select by colour but is it possible to select by tonality
> such as shadow area. Please help an ignorant Gimper.

Of course; for applications like this, I typically use QuickMask mode.

I
1. Copy the image
2. Enter QuickMask mode
3. Paste the image and Anchor it
4. Colors->Auto->Normalize
5. Exit QuickMask mode

The above will select pixels based on their intensity -- a pixel of 0
intensity being 0% selected, 127 intensity == 50% selected, 255 ==
100% selected.
You could modify this with various tools in the Colors menu to get the
desired effect.
For instance, your original 'select the shadows' idea could be done by simply
1. Colors->Invert
2. Adjust with Colors->Curves to taste, or threshold using
Colors->Threshold if you wanted a hard-edged selection

The above is the advanced method, with more control and
sophistication. However, simply setting the 'select by' option to
'Value' for the 'select by color' tool might do what you want.

Hope that helps!

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I change text color in existing object?

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Carusoswi  wrote:
> If someone will explain to me how to subscribe here, I will do my best to
> answer using the proper method.  I discovered this forum during a search on
> Gimp.  My mail client is gmail.
So is mine :) So I expect you should have no trouble with this:

1. Go to the url I previously provided, http://www.gimp.org/mail_lists.html
2. Click on 'Gimp-user'
3. Fill out the 'Subscribing' part of the form, then click on the
'Subscribe' button
(Note -- your email address is the only part of the form that is
strictly required)
4. You will be emailed to confirm your subscription. Follow the
instructions given.
5. That's all.

Hope that helps.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I change text color in existing object?

[David Gowers]

2009/4/5 Cristian Secară :
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 16:32:25 +0930, David Gowers wrote:
>
>> Yes. If you want to be respectful of the people posting here, to this
>> mailing list (gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu) , then please stop
>> using the 'forum' interface on gimpusers.com and instead, genuinely
>> subscribe to this mailing list.
>
> If so, then what is the purpose of the "forum" ? Who has interest that
> some people can (tehnically) be non-respectful of the people posting
> here ? (why is not the "forum" simply erased then ?)

You seem to have the idea that the forum was created by some of the
same people who maintain this mailing list. This is very far from the
truth -- Some random person, who has hardly posted at all on this
mailing list, just said one day "I've set up forums on gimpusers.com
that provide an interface to the GIMP mailing lists, hope you like,
tell me what you think".
A few of the core GIMP developers objected quite strongly, and later
indicated that the best thing would be to take it down altogether.
Their objections were ignored.

The purpose of the forum, I cannot directly comment on; although I'd
guess that it aimed to make posting easier. It achieved that, at the
cost of the confusion and inconvenience of both the forum users and
the people genuinely subscribed to this mailing list.
If anyone only wanted to read the gimp-user mailing list, the GMANE
archives would be perfectly adequate (with the advantage that they
represent the emails as.. emails rather than forum threads/posts ;
proper threading et al)

One problem that I haven't even mentioned yet is people thinking the
mailing list is a message board. This might seem unproblematic,  but
there are significant difference in etiquette between message boards
and mailing lists, and the functional differences between the
gimpusers.com forums and this mailing list have already caused
problems in this area.

Overall, the forum simply causes more problems than it solves.

Whose interest it is in (this is not a technical issue, this is a
matter of misrepresentation and confusion effecting readers and
posters accessing this list both in the approved way and through the
forums) -- I hope that is evident from earlier parts of this email.

Re: the reply-to issue:
I have to agree, this has occasionally bit me. OTOH, what exactly do
you expect your mailer to do when you choose 'reply' rather than
'reply to all'? It seems to me sensible that 'reply' should reply to
the original author, rather than all people who saw the mail -- that's
what 'reply to all' is for, right? If this distinction does not exist
for many of the mailing lists you subscribe to, I have to say that
this is an inconsistency in the opposite direction.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I change text color in existing object?

[David Gowers]

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Carusoswi  wrote:
> Now, I'm confused.  Should I not be posting by signing on to the forum and
> typing responses?
You should only be using the bogus 'forum' interface on gimpusers.com
if you want to annoy and confuse some of the other people using this
mailing list (which is what it is, not a forum! The fact you are
almost certainly seeing this message through the 'forum' doesn't mean
anything to the contrary! The 'forum' is simply a piece of software
which presents this mailing list as if it were truly a forum.)

> I have to type in the two word display to "prevent
> automatic spam postings".
> So, am I going about it wrongly?

Yes. If you want to be respectful of the people posting here, to this
mailing list (gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu) , then please stop
using the 'forum' interface on gimpusers.com and instead, genuinely
subscribe to this mailing list.

See http://www.gimp.org/mail_lists.html for details of how to
subscribe to any of the GIMP related mailing lists.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] How do I change text color in existing object?

[David Gowers]

Hi Maureen,

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 5:00 AM, Maureen  wrote:
> I've been getting the digest from this "user list" and I'm completely
> confused. I've also submitted a question but received no response.
>
> I read in the latest Digest that this is a "mailing list", not a "message
> board". I don't understand the difference, and I don't understand how
> problems that are presented and answered are "mailing list" items as opposed
> to a "forum/message board" that addresses problems. Am I using the wrong
> service to obtain help in using Gimp? An explanation would be helpful,
> instead of just "dead air".

You are subscribed to the mailing list correctly. The only way there
is of 'doing it wrongly' is using the forum interface provided,
against developers wishes, by gimpusers.com.

The differences between a message board and a mailing list are many.
The most important one, and the reason why the gimpusers forum
interface is so broken, is that forums typically have 'flat' threading
:
the first post is the 'parent' post, and all following posts on the
subject are 'child' posts (so there is only one level of nesting);

Whereas mailing lists are just systems to relay emails to a list of
people, and so they have all the normal, complete, infinitely-nestable
threading capabilities inherent in email, which tends to make it much
more clear who was replying to who.

This difference is mainly what has been causing the trouble (some
emails not showing up on the gimpusers.com 'message board', confusion
about who is quoting whom by users of the gimpusers.com 'message
board').
In one instance, someone asked a question via gimpusers.com 'boards',
could not see any of the 4 replies posted (by people who were actually
genuinely subscribed to the mailing list), and later posted saying
"Anyone?". I went to the trouble of signing up at gimpusers.com in
order to tell him 'Stop that, and subscribe to the mailing list like
an ordinary sane person!'.

Just to make it completely clear -- if your email address when posting
to this list shows up as "YOURNAME ", you are
accessing this list through the gimpusers forums. Otherwise, you are
not doing so (and should therefore experience no strange behaviours
arising from the message board software trying to pretend that
gimp-user is a message board rather than a mailing list).
For example, someone named 'Nyt' recently posted using the gimpusers
forum interface, in the thread named 'shutdown'

I hope that helps,

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] shutdown

[David Gowers]

Hi Carusoswi,

I just need to correct this one thing:

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Carusoswi  wrote:
> Not certain if this reply is directed to the right party - having trouble
> deciphering quotes from new postings on this board, however:

This is not a message board, it is a mailing list. I daresay your
problems arise from using the gimpusers forums, which pretend, with
limited effectiveness, that this mailing list is a message board.
Both the users of the board and the users of this mailing-list
(gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu) have been confused and
inconvenienced multiple times by the erratic results of the gimpusers
board emulation software.
Please stop using it, and instead subscribe to
gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu , which is the normal way to access
this mailing list.

(see http://www.gimp.org/mail_lists.html)

Thanks.

David
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user