[Gimp-user] Printing Problem
I just installed gimp with Ubuntu 10.10. Simple problem. Any way I try to print, the printer produces a blank sheet of paper. HPDeskJetPro prints any other program's output. It seems that the package on Ubuntu gets the 2,6.10 with the cairo software that doesn't work. Have I answered my own question? Geoffrey >>Chad, >>Can you print _anything_ from Gimp? >>If you can print a very tiny image, maybe it is a printer memory problem. >>Sorry, I can't help further. I don't have Vista and I am sitting here >>happily >>emailing from Ubuntu. ;-) >>I will have to get Vista soon (for certain software we will be required to >>use), >>but I will run that under Vmware on the Ubuntu (as I do with XP, W2K, Win95, >>and >>RedHat Linux, and Unixware!). >>Jay >Hi Jay, >Thanks for the idea. I was trying to print a fairly large graphic file size. >Will try a small simple graphic and will also try saving as a .jpg instead of >Gimp's default format and see if that works for me. I'll let you know but it >may be a few days until I can get back to the forum to let you know. >Thanks again. >I love forums -- You usually get the best answers there. :) >Chad -- geoffrey (via gimpusers.com) ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] STOP
Terry Moss wrote: > Please take me off your mailing list.I am getting > stacks of Emails which are no good to me at all and it's just clogging > up my PC. > > PLEASE NO MORE. The rules are, if you can subscribe to the list, you can unsubscribe from the list. It's your responsibility to do so, not the list maintainers. (Note to self: make it harder to subscribe to a list then unsubscribing...) -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] GTK+ print or gutenprint?
I'm curious as to which would be the preferred print functionality? I've noticed both options but can't really tell much difference in the quality of the output. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] How to generate a frame
edward storm wrote: > Page 74 of Peck's book shows the layers for a flower image. One of > the layers is for a picture frame. Is there > a facility in The Gimp to generate such a frame? Filters->Decor->Add Border ??? -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] help
Mokla Com wrote: > pls unscribe me. thank you. Generally, when you find yourself somewhere you don't want to go, you can leave the way you came. See the link below which comes with all posts to the list: > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Reducing an image
Thomas Holland wrote: > Hi all, > > I have a photo that I want to reduce down to something that I can post on the > web. How do I do that with Gimp? I have looked all through the menus and > found > nothing. Image->Scale image -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Alt Key
JC Dill wrote: > Geoffrey wrote: > >> I guess you missed the reference to the fact that ALL the work put >> into GIMP is done by the developers on their time. > > I put in many years as one of the primary list admins for an open source > project's -users list (similar to gimp-user) and -dev list, organizing > and adding to the the FAQ, answering questions on both lists, writing > documentation, submitting bug reports, feature requests, and proposing > UI improvements. I'm quite aware of how open source projects are > developed, and I've paid my dues volunteering. I have a right to give > my feedback when I feel an OS project is misguided and has overlooked > critical aspects of design such as consistent tool use (backwards > compatible), intuitive UI, and good documentation. Care to share what this open source project was? -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] please remove me
Deborah R. Wood wrote: If you go to the website listed below (and in every message to the list), you can remove yourself from the list. This is the general expectation on virtually all email lists because as you know, you subscribed yourself. It's kind of like 'you let yourself in, you can let yourself out.' > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Alt Key
JC Dill wrote: > I can hardly be expected to know about something that hasn't been > incorporated, or has just recently been incorporated but not widely > announced. As I said - I'm a "potential Gimp user". I tried it several > years ago, and I am subscribed to this list to stay abreast with the > changes that are discussed on this list. I don't currently have it > installed. Like millions of other potential Gimp users, I don't have > time to install and test it every time you release a new version to see > if it's "ready for prime time" yet. Rather than try to convince me it's > great (while you also admit you are "just beginning" to incorporate > needed changes as a result of a usability evaluation), it would be nice > if you would just admit that it still needs a lot of work, and that you > will let the user (and potential user) community know when you have > actually done the work to make it easier to use for non-programmers. Troll back to Photoshop please. I for one, appreciate the work the GIMP developers have done and continue to do on this wonderful application. JC, you just doesn't get it. I guess you missed the reference to the fact that ALL the work put into GIMP is done by the developers on their time. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] only one gimp
Lionel Tarazon Alcocer wrote: > Hi all, > > Each time I open a file (double-click over the image), a new GIMP application > opens even if there was already one. Opening images this way may end up with > lots of GIMP's opened at the same time... > > Is there a way of opening files in the same GIMP application? without using > "File->Open" of course. I've searched through the GIMP preferences but haven't > found an option. > > Thanks gimp-remote -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Out of office on Vacation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I will be out of the office starting 11/16/2007 and will not return until > 11/26/2007. BIG party at Andy's house on the 25th! -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp and iscan
Sven Neumann wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 18:50 -0500, Geoffrey wrote: >> I had gimp and iscan working just fine on fedora 6 and gimp 2.2. I have >> a new installation of fedora 8. I've got gimp 2.4 and iscan 2.6 >> installed via rpm. When I open gimp and select Xtns->Aquire image, I >> see 'Scanning (iscan)' but it's grayed out. If I remove the iscan rpm >> the Aquire option is no longer there, so I know that iscan rpm is trying >> to register the plugin. > > Does the menu become sensitive if you have an image opened? Could be a > problem with the iscan plug-in registering for certain image types when > it should use an empty string. Sure enough. I opened gimp, opened a file and when I go to scan, the option is available. Bug? Or, is this something I can fix on my end? -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] gimp and iscan
I had gimp and iscan working just fine on fedora 6 and gimp 2.2. I have a new installation of fedora 8. I've got gimp 2.4 and iscan 2.6 installed via rpm. When I open gimp and select Xtns->Aquire image, I see 'Scanning (iscan)' but it's grayed out. If I remove the iscan rpm the Aquire option is no longer there, so I know that iscan rpm is trying to register the plugin. Any suggestions would be appreciated. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dodge & burn tutorial?
Gracia M. Littauer wrote: > I found on for PS (which should be useful), but wondered if gimp has one Yes on my install, it's the last icon, looks like a small black ball with an extension on it. Keystroke shortcut is: Shift+D -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Noise-non-noise
David Southwell wrote: > On Tuesday 02 October 2007 10:05:51 Sven Neumann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> while your explanation of non-destructive editing is all fine, I still >> think that your postings to this list are nothing but noise. This list >> is about using GIMP. The users who are interested in development know >> very well that everything you asked for is already on our roadmap. You >> can even get a sneak preview today by looking at the GEGL project. If >> you want to help, we need more people working on the code and we also >> need people experienced in user interaction design and usability. I >> don't think though that we need more people pointing out the obvious >> flaws in GIMP. We are all very well aware of them and you are just >> stealing our precious time. >> >> >> Sven > > Sven people ask these questions and they are very relevant to users. Every > contribution is noise to someone.. The problem as I see it is, your contributions of late have been 99% noise.. I don't see any use in hashing over these issues. If you would read the rest of Sven's post you would understand why they are noise. You're so damn focused on trying to make everyone see it your way you miss the facts that should be slapping you in the face. On a moderated list, you would have been labeled a troll and requested to terminate this line of posts. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] [Fwd: Re: printing on DVD]
norman wrote: >>> The printer I have is said to be capable of printing on a CD or DVD. I >>> wondered if it were possible to prepare and print images using Gimp and, >>> if so, how would one go about the task? >> Take a look at glabels. I don't know what kind of layout you must >> produce in order to print directly to the cd/dvd, so that might be an >> issue here as well. >> >> What I do is create art work with Gimp then import it into glabels for >> printing on cd/dvd labels. Again, it'll depend on what kind of layout >> the printer expects when printing directly to the cd/dvd. > > I have considered printing labels using glabels which seems to be quite > a useful piece of software for producing all sorts of labels. Glabels > certainly provides such a good range of templates that one is spoilt for > choice. My reason for pursuing the print to DVD approach is that I only > want one label per DVD and the templates appear to give two the same. I > must look further. When you select to print, you are given the option to print any combination of the labels (upper label, lower label, both labels). -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] [Fwd: Re: printing on DVD]
norman wrote: > The printer I have is said to be capable of printing on a CD or DVD. I > wondered if it were possible to prepare and print images using Gimp and, > if so, how would one go about the task? Take a look at glabels. I don't know what kind of layout you must produce in order to print directly to the cd/dvd, so that might be an issue here as well. What I do is create art work with Gimp then import it into glabels for printing on cd/dvd labels. Again, it'll depend on what kind of layout the printer expects when printing directly to the cd/dvd. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
Manish Singh wrote: > Please stop posting to the list, as all you can seem to do is post > misinformation and assertions that you cannot back up. I would take it one more step and request that no one respond to any more posts on this discussion. David, you're a troll, please drop this issue. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] help
James Wampler wrote: > I would like to unsubscribe! Get me off this list! You go out the same way you came in. People are unlikely to assist you when you make demands. You might consider returning to the page you subscribed from and doing it yourself as is expected. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] acting on several layers
Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: > On Friday 26 January 2007 02:03, T F wrote: >> is there a way (and tutorial) on applying changes to several layers >> at once? for example as if they had already been merged? > > You can't paint on seeral layers at once. What if you created a separate transparent layer on top of the layers you want to paint. Paint on this layer then merge it with the layers you want to have it applied? -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Brendan wrote: On Friday 29 September 2006 14:05, Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 06:54 -0600, Roland Hordos wrote: While all other credible opensource projects are gaining ground in a professional IT setting, the GIMP is being held back because of the instant derogatory impact of the name. First of all, it's called "GIMP", not "the GIMP". Then, can you proove your claim? I very much doubt that you can because it's just FUD. For most people on this planet, GIMP doesn't have any special meaning. Yeah, total disagreement on this one. Please, don't make your argument lack any sort of impact by lying. Pulp Fiction: "Bring out the Gimp". Guy in a leather outfit, with a mask. This is what 90% of the people say to me when I mention the Gimp for the first time. "Hey, you remember in Pulp Fiction"..."Yes, I know. But it's an acronym"... The fact that so many people have such poor taste in movies shouldn't cloud your view of the issue. I never saw the movie, thus I don't make the connection. I'm sure that we all find a reference to a word in a movie or book and turn it into such an argument. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Alan Horkan wrote: On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Geoffrey wrote: Not really a "product" per se, but I'd say you nailed it. Personally, I would never be caught dead in a Hooters. Your example leads me to believe you'd equate the quality of GIMP users with the quality of Hooter's clientele. Maybe that wasn't your intention... (boy, this thread has gone nutty). No, it certainly was not. In my mind the comparison of GIMP to Hooters is not valid. GIMP is not intended to be derogatory, but we all know how Hooters gets it's name. I'm a GIMP user as well, thus I don't equate myself with the scum you'll find frequenting Hooters. :) Do you have a problem with owls? The name is perfectly acceptable! Either you're joking or you're entirely clueless... Either way, it's an unacceptable response to an issue that, up until this point I had assumed was a serious issue to you. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Eric P wrote: Geoffrey wrote: Michael Schumacher wrote: Roland Hordos wrote: If you can point out a single commercial product that has mass use in North America that has a derogatory term in it's title, I'll withdraw my critique and be gone. Hooters the restaurant. Not really a "product" per se, but I'd say you nailed it. Personally, I would never be caught dead in a Hooters. Your example leads me to believe you'd equate the quality of GIMP users with the quality of Hooter's clientele. Maybe that wasn't your intention... (boy, this thread has gone nutty). No, it certainly was not. In my mind the comparison of GIMP to Hooters is not valid. GIMP is not intended to be derogatory, but we all know how Hooters gets it's name. I'm a GIMP user as well, thus I don't equate myself with the scum you'll find frequenting Hooters. :) -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Michael Schumacher wrote: Roland Hordos wrote: If you can point out a single commercial product that has mass use in North America that has a derogatory term in it's title, I'll withdraw my critique and be gone. Hooters the restaurant. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Steve Bibayoff wrote: Hello, On 9/29/06, Roland Hordos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... [...]If you can point out a single commercial product that has mass use in North America that has a derogatory term in it's title, Yahoo I'll withdraw my critique and be gone. :-) How about the Macon Georgia hockey team: Macon Whoopee. They have a pretty good draw... :) -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Manish Singh wrote: On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:38:02PM -0600, Roland Hordos wrote: can you proove your claim? Sigh. Try googling "is gimp a derogatory term". If you read the sources at the first 10 hits and you still don't understand, then try the next 15000. If I search for the string "is gimp a derogatory term" I get one hit. If I search for: is gimp a derogatory term Not quoted, and therefore locating these as separate search keys, then I get 16,700 hits. You need to learn how to use a search engine. That is not proof. Agreed. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Roland Hordos wrote: For most people on this planet, GIMP doesn't have any special meaning. .. Thank you, I'll correct my original comment. Change that to say: "While all other credible opensource projects are gaining ground in a professional IT setting, the GIMP is being held back in the English speaking world because of the instant derogatory impact of the name. Gimp is a term in common culture that refers to a disabled person in a demeaning way." I've been using gimp for a long while now, right here in the english speaking USA, and I've not once heard anyone comment regarding the name and associating it with the word 'gimp.' I've also not heard anyone use the term gimp in the way you indicate in a very long time. And I don't believe that's because people are more politically correct these days. I think it's a term that just isn't used in this way any longer. I think you're blowing this way out of proportion. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
John R. Culleton wrote: Bottom line, I thought the name "Gimp" a bit lame when I first heard it but now it falls trippingly from my tongue. When I hear it in the context of software, I think of GIMP, not the 'word' gimp. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name
Alan Horkan wrote: On Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Roland Hordos wrote: Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 06:54:48 -0600 From: Roland Hordos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU" Subject: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name Hi, While all other credible opensource projects are gaining ground in a professional IT setting, the GIMP is being held back because of the instant derogatory impact of the name. If someone who can champion this task reads this, please humble yourself for the sake of this amazing software that some of us are embarrassed to promote, or simply won't until the name is changed. I agree (and have always agreed but continued to use the software nonetheless) however the changing of the name presents some difficulties. It's not a word, it's an acronym. Definitions of the WORD gimp: an ornamental flat braid or round cord used as a trimming SPIRIT, VIM CRIPPLE LIMP LIMP, HOBBLE So, I guess it's up to your interpretation. -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] determining file type
Jeffrey McBeth wrote: I have some image files for which the extension may have been written incorrectly, i.e. they say .jpg but i suspect they are really png's. Can GIMP tell me the file type of a file it has opened. I know it examines the magic numbers to determine how to handle it so it must know. How can I make it tell me!!! Or if you know of an easy way to determine file type, without relying on the extension, from a non GIMP technique or tool. I sent you a message offline about how to do it using a text editor. But, I forgot some things If you use Linux or Mac, you can type "file filenamehere" and it will tell you a bunch of information about the file (including the type). imagemagick comes with identify, which is a great tool, particularily for image files. -- Until later, Geoffrey Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [ale] [Gimp-user] printing landscape on 3x5 cards
Jim Philips wrote: On Monday 17 April 2006 21:14, Geoffrey wrote: David Lee wrote: On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:37:17 -0400 Jim Philips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have some 3x5 templates in .png format that I downloaded. I want to print them out in landscape format, because if I print them as portrait my printer bracket won't come in tight enough to hold the card in place. So, I open the .png in Gimp and flip it 90 degrees and save it. I then try to print it from Gimp, with 3x5 specified as the paper size. What gets printed is a long string of raw Postscript and nothing else. I have to kill the print job. I'm using Gimp 2.2.10 with CUPS 1.1.23 on a Slackware box. Any clues as to what is wrong? Am I using a crappy print driver? The printer is an Epson C-62 inkjet. It prints without problems otherwise, even some 3x5 cards in landscape. But those are from a Web page where formatting is enforced by CSS. I believe you will need to pick "setup printer" from the print dialog and pick the type of printer you are using. This is what did the trick for me. One thing I recall about the GIMP is that it wants a non compressed ppd file. What I've had to do is go to the directory where they exist and unpack the file there. Make sure you retain the gunzipped version though because other applications look for it. For example, for my Minolta laser I have the following ppd files: /usr/share/cups/model/Minolta-magicolor_2300_DL.ppd /usr/share/cups/model/Minolta-magicolor_2300_DL.ppd.gz You set this in the setup printer dialog of GIMP David has mentioned. OK. I found the .ppd file and created an unzipped version. It made no difference. What distro is this? Did you use the setup printer option in gimp to make sure it's pointed to the proper ppd file? ___ Ale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale -- Until later, Geoffrey Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] printing landscape on 3x5 cards
David Lee wrote: On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:37:17 -0400 Jim Philips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have some 3x5 templates in .png format that I downloaded. I want to print them out in landscape format, because if I print them as portrait my printer bracket won't come in tight enough to hold the card in place. So, I open the .png in Gimp and flip it 90 degrees and save it. I then try to print it from Gimp, with 3x5 specified as the paper size. What gets printed is a long string of raw Postscript and nothing else. I have to kill the print job. I'm using Gimp 2.2.10 with CUPS 1.1.23 on a Slackware box. Any clues as to what is wrong? Am I using a crappy print driver? The printer is an Epson C-62 inkjet. It prints without problems otherwise, even some 3x5 cards in landscape. But those are from a Web page where formatting is enforced by CSS. I believe you will need to pick "setup printer" from the print dialog and pick the type of printer you are using. This is what did the trick for me. One thing I recall about the GIMP is that it wants a non compressed ppd file. What I've had to do is go to the directory where they exist and unpack the file there. Make sure you retain the gunzipped version though because other applications look for it. For example, for my Minolta laser I have the following ppd files: /usr/share/cups/model/Minolta-magicolor_2300_DL.ppd /usr/share/cups/model/Minolta-magicolor_2300_DL.ppd.gz You set this in the setup printer dialog of GIMP David has mentioned. -- Until later, Geoffrey Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] important GIMP features for the future ?
Michael Schumacher wrote: Michael Schumacher wrote: devvv wrote: Some schools are switching to GIMP/2 soon because of me and my courses ;) I'm posting a list below that imo is very important for an easier and more accessible use of GIMP2! I'm sure you've heard them all already but they're really needed! The bug numbers are in parentheses. Do your courses also include a part about GIMP being Open Source Software and that one can and should contribute to it if a feature should to get in faster? As you can see, some of the bugs in your list are quite old, and having patches attached to them would help a lot. There might be just one or two people at each school who are interested, but their contributions are welcome. BTW, gimp-developer would have been the better list for this message. Someone wrote me that the above mail can be misunderstood. No, it is not intended as "Who do you think you are? If you want something done, do it yourself", it was just supposed to be a simple question with an explanation why I'm asking it. I, personally, took it as you intended. I think we all need to get the word out that this great application could always use more coders. -- Until later, Geoffrey Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] batch convert
Stephan Hegel wrote: Does ImageMagick support the xcf file format ? Yes, it does. Patrick Shanahan wrote: * Adly Mabro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [04-07-06 22:48]: Does anyone know how I can convert a batch of .xcf files to .jpg? Use ImageMagick, put all in one directory and: for i in *.xcf; do convert $i `basename $i jpg`; done those are backtics before basename and after jpg. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user -- Until later, Geoffrey Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimpshop
Brendan wrote: On Thursday 02 March 2006 08:19, Geoffrey wrote: Because Gimshop has generated more excitement than the Gimp ever has and certain people might be a little ruffled? Who are you kidding? Why don't you simply take your trolling elsewhere. I've been using gimp for years now, never had an interest in using it in a windows environment, never will. I'm not interested in seeing GIMP emulate Photoshop. You don't like what I say, so it's trolling? From wikipedia: In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who posts rude or offensive messages on the Internet, such as on online discussion forums, to disrupt discussion or to upset its participants. I've heard very little about GIMPSHOP, yet you claim it's 'generated more excitement then the Gimp ever has.' Are you that insecure? Now that is funny. I have used Gimp for years, mostly in Linux, but also in Windows. I even owned a school that taught Gimp in a class. So, you could say that I am a bit of a cheerleader. I don't give a rat's that you don't like my opinion, because it's something I hear often...comparisons and wishes about it and PS. How about backing up your statement with some facts? Google: gimp: 30,600,000 hits gimpshop: 447,000 hits Wow, that's a lot of excitement alright. Then let them stay with Photoshop if their issue is such. They want their cake and eat it too. They want GIMP price, but they don't want to learn a better interface. You say better... I think we have reached the limit of your ability to converse thoughtfully in this conversation. My ability extends well beyond your understanding. fortunately or unfortunately. It's a shame that Gimpshop as a project isn't really much in the way of structure, but why not rip it off and inspire them to get better? Make fun of them until they change? Write a guide for people to make Gimpshop "proper" for inclusion, and heck, even I might give it a shot. You can not fix the way it was created. That is the issue at hand. As other's have noted, the creator of GIMPSHOP has created confusion by not following the accepted protocol for forking an application. He/she should have made reasonable attempts to work with the existing developers. As it is, it's a poor and confusing hack. Oh well, it's done, so let's take what it generated and try to bring something positive out of it. Trying to surf the wave of interest would be NICE. Just because something has 'happened' doesn't mean you accept it. I personally don't want to start seeing confusing posts regarding interfaces because someone is posting about gimpshop on a gimp list. They are not the same, and the creation of gimpshop was not done in a respectable way with regard to the original work. It was not done in a way that respects the years of work that the developers have put into the GIMP. I'd suggest that someone create a GIMPSHOP list and post questions regarding that charade there. -- Until later, Geoffrey War never solved anything, well, except slavery, fascism and communism ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimpshop
Brendan wrote: On Wednesday 01 March 2006 05:46, Manish Singh wrote: Gimpshop slaps the people who know the code of gimp in the face, and then expects gimp.org to take up the slack because they don't know how to properly support a community. I don't see why the animosity is so surprising. Because Gimshop has generated more excitement than the Gimp ever has and certain people might be a little ruffled? Who are you kidding? Why don't you simply take your trolling elsewhere. I've been using gimp for years now, never had an interest in using it in a windows environment, never will. I'm not interested in seeing GIMP emulate Photoshop. Perhaps because Gimpshop fulfills a need that has been ignored for a long time? Artists get used to a tool and they don't want to learn a new one. Photoshop is usually that tool, Then let them stay with Photoshop if their issue is such. They want their cake and eat it too. They want GIMP price, but they don't want to learn a better interface. fortunately or unfortunately. It's a shame that Gimpshop as a project isn't really much in the way of structure, but why not rip it off and inspire them to get better? Make fun of them until they change? Write a guide for people to make Gimpshop "proper" for inclusion, and heck, even I might give it a shot. You can not fix the way it was created. That is the issue at hand. As other's have noted, the creator of GIMPSHOP has created confusion by not following the accepted protocol for forking an application. He/she should have made reasonable attempts to work with the existing developers. As it is, it's a poor and confusing hack. -- Until later, Geoffrey War never solved anything, well, except slavery, fascism and communism ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimpshop
JC Dill wrote: Michael Schumacher wrote: JC Dill wrote: So when someone asks you to tell them how wonderful "this forum" is, you can assume they are inviting comparison with all other forums on the topic, not just other mailing lists. Well, this is a mailing list. Anyone who uses it via a different access vector should be aware of this - mailing lists, like newsgroups, have more formal requirements to the message style than e.g. a web forum. For example: proper quoting, character encoding, addressing, ... All of that is irrelevant to the context of how "forum" was used. It was used as an umbrella term to include "this list" as well as "all other lists, forums, usenet groups, etc." that could be compared with "this list". I think we have beat this horse sufficiently. It is dead, please let's move on to relevant subjects.. -- Until later, Geoffrey War never solved anything, well, except slavery, fascism and communism ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] doing with the gimp what www.scanR.com does
peer miaskowski wrote: Hi list! Is it possible to do with the gimp (automatically?) what www.scanR.com does? I'm not sure you would want it to. Seems the primary function of scanr is scanning and sending, neither of which is native to GIMP. At least I don't think so. I do see that it cleans up the image, but I suspect that's a lot of propaganda. They'll certainly show you the best efforts the software makes. I doubt there's any software that is going to 'magically' align and correct errors in a photographed document. Really, how does it know what's a shadow verses a border or such? I'd suggest you're probably better off sending the image with your phone to an email and then cleaning it up by hand. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp doesn't recognize my usb scanner
GRONDIN Bertrand wrote: Hi ! After compiling and installing GIMP, the program doesn't recognize my USB SCANNER. But Linux does it. Can you help me ? Have you installed the xsane front ends? What version of GIMP, what distro and version of that distro. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: image preview in file selection
Olivier Ripoll wrote: Michael Schumacher wrote: With the new file selector, is it possible to have the thumbnail view that the previous file selector had? How about trying it yourself? :) HTH, Michael Michael, On Windows version of gimp, there is no thumbnail in the "open" window. If you know a way to have thumnails there, please tell me how, I would like to have it working as on my linux box at home. What version of gimp are you running on your Linux box that has the thumbnail? When the file selector was changed, it went away, at least on my system. I'm running 2.0.4 here. Sorry can't help you with windows, I "don't do windows." -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] image preview in file selection
Michael Schumacher wrote: With the new file selector, is it possible to have the thumbnail view that the previous file selector had? How about trying it yourself? :) I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that. The previous file selector had it by default. I'd be happy to 'try it myself' if I knew how to enable it. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] image preview in file selection
I thought I saw a thread on this before, but couldn't locate it via google or the archives. With the new file selector, is it possible to have the thumbnail view that the previous file selector had? -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Install
GR Kumaran wrote: Hello, Can anyone give me the address or steps on how to install Gimp in MandrakeLinux? I had downloaded the RPM from Fedora, but I could not install it, when I do 'rpm -i ..'.Here the questions is, actually I am very new to Linux. So here I now request someone to help. Mandrake comes with an rpm for Gimp, you should use that one. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: GimpShop
Jonathan D Gibbons wrote: Now, what I think would be really wonderful along these lines would be a setup whereby The Gimp can be easily "skinned" to a rearranged UI like this. Personally, I'd prefer that the developers work on enhancing the tool rather than making the tool look pretty (ier). I'd suggest that if someone likes the idea of skins, they take up that project and do it. Then get it into the code. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Michael Schumacher wrote: On a Suse 9.2 self-compiled Gimp 2.2 with 1 Gb of Ram and 1 Gb of swap, and app. 30 Gb free on the harddrive where Gimp has it's swap/cache. I have been working on some hollyday photos, all about 3,5 Mb of size, to crop, rotate and others to make them ready for showing on the tv. All were OK and I made copies in the xcf format, but when I tried to save in the jpeg format, Gimp crashed - not each time, but still too often. Maybe SuSE broke the libjpeg they ship with 9.2? I don't use gimp a lot, but I have used it on 9.2 to create/modify a number of jpegs, I'd say 20-30. For those folks who are having these problems, are you keeping your SuSE up to date with YOU? That's the only other thing I could imagine. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Hans Henrik Hansen wrote: Tuesday, 29 March 2005 23:22 Sven Neumann wrote: You can control the amount of memory that GIMP uses by tuning the tile-cache size setting. GIMP will then use a swap file instead of causing an OOM situation that might cause it to be killed by the OS. Of course things will become rather slow as soon as GIMP starts using the swap file. I did it again tonight under almost identical circumstances: Similar background picture, similar text (only four text layers this time, though): No 'sluggishness', no problems with saving - so in some way it remains a mystery what happened last time!? Are you sure the circumstances were identical? Did you have anything else running on the box before that's not running now? I still suspect it was an issue of not enough memory/swap. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Geoffrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I have attempted to duplicate the problem as well. I'm running SuSE 9.2 and re-installed gimp 2.0. The only thing I can find that creates such a problem is when gimp takes up too much memory and the OS kills gimp. I have 9.2 on a laptop with 768 mb memory. I created a very large jpeg and saved it fine on this box. I then removed 512 mb of memory, performed the same and gimp hit the cache. Once the cache approached being full, GIMP was killed by the OS. You can control the amount of memory that GIMP uses by tuning the tile-cache size setting. GIMP will then use a swap file instead of causing an OOM situation that might cause it to be killed by the OS. Of course things will become rather slow as soon as GIMP starts using the swap file. Understood. I should have been more specific. I was referring to the OS running completely out of memory (ram and swap). In such a case, the OS begins to kill processes it thinks are the culprit. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Jeffrey McBeth wrote: Holy cow guys, you are both being overly rude. Calm down. I'm working through Peter's problems, I hope help him on this. I have so far been unable to reproduce his issue, even with the image he has provided, which BTW, counts as one of the more disconcerting images I've seen in a while. I have attempted to duplicate the problem as well. I'm running SuSE 9.2 and re-installed gimp 2.0. The only thing I can find that creates such a problem is when gimp takes up too much memory and the OS kills gimp. I have 9.2 on a laptop with 768 mb memory. I created a very large jpeg and saved it fine on this box. I then removed 512 mb of memory, performed the same and gimp hit the cache. Once the cache approached being full, GIMP was killed by the OS. What do you do for a living? Who me? I'm a software consultant. C, Perl, Postgresql, cgi... I also spend a lot of time fixing crashed/infected windows computers. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Peter Jon White wrote: Different than what? If you mean different than the three original posts asking for assistance, they got no response at all. Perhaps that's what you mean by better results? It was only when I made my critical post that I got any reply. But as I suggested in that post, it's all moot, since Photoshop works just fine. Great, then leave this list and find your way back to your Photoshop... -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Peter Jon White wrote: Geoffrey wrote: Ignore him, nothing but a troll. Really? If so, it's the first time in the history of the internet that a troll has signed his posting. That's utter crap. troll As used on the Internet: 1) As a verb, the practice of trying to lure other Internet users into sending responses to carefully-designed incorrect statements or similar "bait." It's interesting that you had nothing to say when I reported the problem, twice. And it's interesting that you had nothing to say when I asked for a source of paid support. I don't answer questions I don't have an answer for. I'm a user, not a developer of GIMP. With your attitude, I'm less likely to attempt to assist with any problem you might have. If you'd like, search www.ale.org for my email address and you'll find where I provide a lot of assistance to issues I have knowledge in. GIMP just isn't one of them. Software that doesn't work as advertised isn't of much use. And if there's no way to get assistance, business users like myself will not waste much time trying to get it to work when there are alternatives. This might match your perception, regardless, it is highly skewed. Again, if you take a different approach you might get a better results. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Hans Henrik Hansen wrote: Sunday, 27 March 2005 16:26 Jeffrey Brent McBeth wrote: XCF is the GIMP native format that allows all the information you create during editing (layers, paths, etc) OK - thanks. How many pixels are these JPEGs? The original picture (background layer) is 542 kB. With the four added layers it's 1.4 MB, altogether. How much memory do you have? About 328 MB. This is likely your problem. How much swap on the box? -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Hans Henrik Hansen wrote: Thanks for prompt reply - I'll (attempt to) look into mentioned updates. BTW: What is XCF?? :) Forgot about this. XCF is gimp's native format. Save as XCF and it retains your various layers. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Hans Henrik Hansen wrote:
Thanks for prompt reply - I'll (attempt to) look into mentioned updates.
BTW: What is XCF?? :)
I might add the information that prior to my first 'save as'-attempt(s), the
computer began acting rather 'sluggishly': Even simple(?) tasks took VERY
long time to accomplish - it felt like running short on RAM??
Could be, how much memory do you have on this box?
I'm in no way any kind of expert on graphics handling, but during GIMP
installation I got the impression that some kind of 'virtual memory' ('swap')
was being allocated (64 MB?)
It can use swap, but you really don't want it to. It's unlikely that
GIMP would crash if it's using swap. More likely, the OS killed GIMP as
it determined that it was using too much memory. You'll likely find a
message in /var/log/messages indicating as such if this was the case.
I don't know the specific memory requirements for the transactions I
performed, but intuitively they would seem << 64 MB!?
How large was the image?
--
Until later, Geoffrey
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp crashed while saving
Jeffrey Brent McBeth wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 10:17:47PM -0500, Peter Jon White wrote: Hans Henrik Hansen wrote: This evening I installed GIMP 2.0 under SuSE 9.2/KDE3.3.0 I wanted to add some text layers to a .jpg-file - five layers altogether. When I attempted 'save as' GIMP crashed, and all my work was gone! :( One more attempt ended same way - finally I got through by saving one layer at a time! I am wondering if this is normal GIMP behavio(u)r?? There is a a couple known bugs in SuSE dealing with JPEGs. I can't imagine that being the problem since you are going to save this as a XCF so you keep your layer support, but SuSE updates for the JPEG libraries might still be worth looking into. Make sure your 9.2 is up to date via YOU. I'm running 9.2 here with gimp 2.0 and have no problems saving to xcf or jpeg. Normal Gimp behavior seems to be to not work much at all. And normal behavior on the support forums seems to be to ignore requests for assistance. I'm sorry you feel that way. Ignore him, nothing but a troll. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [Gimp-user] virus?
Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: And..for now, I think everyone has had enough of this - could we go back to the GIMP, please? Agreed. My apologies for participating in the off topic post... -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] virus?
Matthew H. Plough wrote: So why do you Linux guys care so much if viruses hit the list? Just delete them as you would any other spam that hits your inbox. Well, let's see. For one thing it's going to be a lot larger then your average email, executables tend to do so. Second, I kinda like receiving email I'm interested in. Third, it's my bloody disk space. Fourth, I receive over 150 email messages a day, so I do my fair share of deleting, I don't want to have to delete messages I didn't want to start with. (I have a camera that watches my driveway so I can ignore people who come to my door, (people spam)) I'm pretty irked that you guys embraced the idea of blocking all messages originating from Windows machines. I hope you show a little bit more common sense in your next message. Don't lump everyone one in the same bag okay? That being said, it is recognized that 99% of spam and viri are generated from Windows boxes. Do note, I was not one of the one's pointing fingers at you. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] virus?
BandiPat wrote: Hey all, Someone brought up the problem of a virus being passed around from the list a few days ago. I remember everyone kind of shot him down though. Well, I have been getting them as well and another just today. The point is, it may very well be coming through the list, but you can not be guaranteed it's coming from the email address listed as the sender without verifying the header information in the email. So, if I send and email with the sender addressed spoofed to an address of someone on the gimp list, it can well get posted to the list and then on out to everyone on the list. But, don't start pointing fingers at the sender unless you've verified the headers of the email address. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then you don't know if any email you receive is truly coming from the address that is listed as the sender. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: Is delivered mail (carefull!)
Matthew H. Plough wrote: Andy, Would you happen to have the original email? I don't believe that I have any viruses on my system; I'm running Thunderbird, Firefox, and the version of Symantec without the vulnerabilities that have just been reported. However, I'd like to see the headers on that email; while it's easy to forge them, there is always the possibility that I do have a virus and need to do something about it. There is a very common virus passing technique beening used these days whereby an email address is harvested from a list archive and used to send a virus infected email to the list. So, that being said, it is impossible to determine if the sender of the virus without viewing the headers of the email. If Andy could forward the headers of that email to you, that would be sufficient in deteriming whether it was spoofed or not. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] multiple pix on canvas?
Gracia M. Littauer wrote: I don't even know how to look up this question in the manual (or ask it there). I want to put 3 pix in 1 file (canvas). Basically to save paper when I have some small pix to print Simple in Photoshop...create a new empty file, click on picture & drag into empty 'file' (canvas?), repeat til all are in & arranged. Since they are layers in PS, I tried every way I could to do the same thing in gimp. I can get the pix in using 'file>open in layer'. BUT they are on top of each other & I can't find a way to move the pix to arrange them. increase your canvas size (image->canvas size), so you have enough space to place your images together. Or, open an new empty canvas large enough to accomodate the images. Open the images separately and cut/paste them to the empty canvas. That's the way I'd do it, someone's bound to have a better way. :) -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: missing pixels
Olivier Ripoll wrote: Well, think as a human being (not a coder, nor an artist). What do you call transparent in life ? The windows of your house or office, be they perfectly clean, dirty or tainted are "transparent". You feel intuitively that transparency is not a binary property, it is a continuum of states. You would never qualified a door opening of "opaque" and "transparent", but you use "open" and "closed". My problem with that thought process is that I think of transparent, translucent and opaque. Transparent is the unreachable clarity of perfectly 'invisible.' Seeing through something as if it's not there. Translucent is that characteristic where what you're looking through 'affects' what you're looking at, not distorting it, but reducing the clarity. Opaque is just that, can't see anything behind it. I never considered anything like 'partial transparency' until I started playing with GIMP. Seems I recognize that functionality in some cases, but not others. For example, I do recall playing with the transparent slider for a layer, knowing full well that it provides a % of transparency. That makes more sense now, after my confusing problems with selection. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: missing pixels
William Skaggs wrote: For people who would be interesting in learning a bit more about this topic, it might be worth taking a look at the related help docs, http://docs.gimp.org/en/ch02s04s04.html and http://docs.gimp.org/en/ch04s03s05.html Thanks for the links. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: Default JPEG quality setting - where?
Owen wrote: On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 08:32:56 -0500 Geoffrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, what is normal use? Websites? What would be a good quality value for a jpeg used on a website? I suppose like every one else, I have done some experiments and am surprised that sometimes a quality of 15-20% is fine for websites. The eye and mind are so easily tricked. I suspect if you want to see something, you will see that, rather than what is there. I wish that worked on my bank account.. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: missing pixels
Olivier Ripoll wrote: You misunderstood. A portion of the "value" (RGBA) of the pixel is selected, not a portion of the pixel geometry. Think of it like a phantom (ghost, whatever you call it): The shape of the human body is totally preserved, but you can see through it. Still, I didn't know you could have a partially transparent pixel. I thought transparency was at the pixel level, that is either a pixel was transparent, or it was not. Then again, I've a coder, not an artist or image expert. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] missing pixels
Dana Sibera wrote: On 10/02/2005, at 1:19 AM, Geoffrey wrote: I had no idea that GIMP could select a portion of a pixel. How is it that it can select a % of the pixel? It depends on the way you make the selection in the first place. If you just use the lasso to select areas, then gimp will select only what's inside the area you draw. If you use the Select->Select By Color tool and click on an area of colour, depending on the Threshold value other colours will be partially selected as well. This is useful when you may wish to make a selection that contains most of the sky in a photo, but that sky may contain grades of colour that stretch across anything from white to light blue. Hmmm, I used the 'select contiguous regions.' I guess that it will do the same as you modify the threshold. I find I use it to make subtle colour shifts - say selecting an area by colour and adjusting colour balance slightly in that area. It's not always so good for selecting large areas to be accurately deleted, or to do other really dynamic changes to :). I again appreciate your insights. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] missing pixels
Dana Sibera wrote: It's a problem, but not so much a bug as a limitation of the 'crawling ants' view that shows a selection. Pixels aren't just 'selected' or 'not selected' in that image, there are some pixels which are 10% selected, 20, 50, 80, 100% selected, and so on. The crawling ants outline view of a selection however, doesn't show anything more than a binary representation - presumably with a cutoff of 50%, meaning you only see the dotted outline around pixels that are more than 50% selected, and those under 50% show as unselected, which includes the areas that are showing up as problems in the shins for example. I had no idea that GIMP could select a portion of a pixel. How is it that it can select a % of the pixel? The Quick Mask mode gives a full representation of a selection, by overlaying a colour (red by default) in various shades to show a selection. For some example images, http://www.danamania.com/temp/ants.jpg is the normal dotted outline view of a selection, zoomed in around the legs. This shows nothing selected on the legs themselves, as some of those pixels are only partially selected. I appreciate the insights. I finally located the quick mask option and can see for myself the problem areas. A quick jump into Quick Mask mode (with Shift-Q or Select->Toggle Quick Mask) shows all though, and http://www.danamania.com/temp/quickmask.jpg indicates that there are some slightly red pixels on the shins, which represent areas that are only partially selected. Those are the ones that show up in Quick Mask mode, and not in the normal crawling ants view of a selection. When in quick mask mode, you can fix this by 'drawing' a selection using the normal drawing tools such as the paintbrush. Drawing in 'black' will cause an area to become selected(red), and drawing in 'white' will cause an area to become unselected(non-red) - so while in Quick Mask mode, draw over the inside area of the legs with 'white' to unselect those partially selected pixels. You should see the red go away, and it'll look like this: http://www.danamania.com/temp/quickmaskfixed.jpg Thanks again for the insights, I was not aware of this functionality. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: Default JPEG quality setting - where?
Henrik Herranen wrote: Manish Singh gimp.org> writes: On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 08:19:29PM +0200, Antti MÃkelà wrote: (No lectures on the default 85 being "enough", thank you - it is not enough, and I can clearly see artifacts on my edited digital photographs if saved with 85.). You do get the lecture from the libjpeg documentation: Quality values above about 95 are NOT recommended for normal use; the compressed file size goes up dramatically for hardly any gain in output image quality. Who said Mr. MÃkelà would be happy with "normal use"? So, what is normal use? Websites? What would be a good quality value for a jpeg used on a website? -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Trouble with layers from psd
Michael Schumacher wrote: Jakub Steiner wrote: On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 19:41 -0800, Carol Spears wrote: it would be nice if everyone would stop making psd files since not everyone can use psd. In many cases people just want to convert their old work. They don't use proprietary formats by ignorance, but simply because of a lack of option and lock-in of their software. You could also argue that you're similarily locked in when using XCF... at least on systems where you can't install the GIMP. Is the XCF format proprietary? If not, then this is not a valid comparison. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] missing pixels
Carol Spears wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 09:13:50PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote: Carol Spears wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 07:51:01PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote: I have been working with selecting sections of a photo so as to remove the background. Although it appears that I have selected the whole portion of the image, when I paste it to new, I see missing pixels. Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong? Point is, if I've missed some pixels, they should show up as not selected right? Gimp 2.0.4 I've dropped the two images here if you would like to check them out. Note the missing pixels on the second image, (primarily on her legs and arms). http://www.cailinsiuil.org/ it would be easier to see the problem with the xcf saved with the selection you used. I put it on the site as well. i looked at this. you could see with quickmask that there were some half alpha areas. i am not sure how you made the selections still, but i was able to fairly simply convert the selection to a path and back again (i did some feathering in between my steps) and the problem went away. I don't understand how there could be half alpha areas. Will the selection tool do this? This was originally a jpeg. I'm not familiar with quickmask, I'll have to look into that. I don't have an understanding of paths either, so that will be a bit of research as well. it would be someone elses call whether it is a bug or not. Agreed. I'd like to understand whether it's my failing to understand the tool I'm using or a bug. Well, I used the clone tool to fix it up, but I'm still thinking there's a problem with GIMP. there are still ways to use the selection -- converting it to a path worked for me. the weird half selected areas were somewhat obvious with quickmask toggled. I'll play with them and see what it does for me. the image demonstrates a problem but it is not enough to determine if it is your technique or a gimp bug. also, before filing a bug report, it might be good to update your gimp to 2.2 and see if the same problem exists there. I know, I've been planning, but it's been busy. I'll download it tonight. :) if they would fix the file selector, it would be darn near perfect; as far as i am concerned. I'm afraid I agree. :) Thanks for the feedback. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] missing pixels
Carol Spears wrote: On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 07:51:01PM -0500, Geoffrey wrote: I have been working with selecting sections of a photo so as to remove the background. Although it appears that I have selected the whole portion of the image, when I paste it to new, I see missing pixels. Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong? Point is, if I've missed some pixels, they should show up as not selected right? Gimp 2.0.4 I've dropped the two images here if you would like to check them out. Note the missing pixels on the second image, (primarily on her legs and arms). http://www.cailinsiuil.org/ it would be easier to see the problem with the xcf saved with the selection you used. I put it on the site as well. it is recommended that you work at 400% view so that you can see if there are problems like this. I looked at it at even a greater % and still could not see any pixels that were not in the selection. another thing to do is to save the selection as a layer in your xcf so you can fix any pixels problems like this, whether it is a problem with the selection technique or with gimp. Well, I used the clone tool to fix it up, but I'm still thinking there's a problem with GIMP. the image demonstrates a problem but it is not enough to determine if it is your technique or a gimp bug. also, before filing a bug report, it might be good to update your gimp to 2.2 and see if the same problem exists there. I know, I've been planning, but it's been busy. I'll download it tonight. :) -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] missing pixels
I have been working with selecting sections of a photo so as to remove the background. Although it appears that I have selected the whole portion of the image, when I paste it to new, I see missing pixels. Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong? Point is, if I've missed some pixels, they should show up as not selected right? Gimp 2.0.4 I've dropped the two images here if you would like to check them out. Note the missing pixels on the second image, (primarily on her legs and arms). http://www.cailinsiuil.org/ -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Antialiasing transparent gifs against a background image
I have an interesting case where I have a circular logo which I overlay on a web-page. The logo needs to have a transparent background, however it is placed over many different elements (the background is not a solid color), so I can't use the smei-flatten code to antialias it. Originally, we had just used flash for the logo, but not all browsers support transparency in flash, so I converted it to a gif (and lost the nice smooth edges) My solution was to import an image of the webpage (without the logo) as a second layer, and do a 'smart' semi-flatten between the transparent logo layer and the background image). This results in antialiasing against any background (doesn't need to be a solid color) as long as it isn't dynamic. Since I did this in Windows, and didn't want to compile everything, I wrote it in Script-Fu. Below is the code if someone finds it useful (Since it is doing pixel-by-pixel checks, it is very slow, and should really be in C, but it works for my needs). Also, while I am familiar with lisp, this is my first attempt at Script-Fu, so the code is pretty cludgy) .Geoff ;; -*-scheme-*- ;; This script will apply semi-flatten against a background layer ;; instead of just a solid color (define (script-fu-smart-semiflattern image drawable fg bkgnd) (gimp-image-undo-disable image) (if (or (or (= fg -1) (= bkgnd -1)) (= fg bkgnd)) t (let () (set! drawable fg) (set! width (car (gimp-drawable-width drawable))) (set! height (car (gimp-drawable-height drawable))) (set! y 0) (while (< y height) (gimp-progress-update (/ y height)) (set! x 0) (while (< x width) (set! pxll (gimp-drawable-get-pixel drawable x y)) (set! pxl (cadr pxll)) (set! alpha (aref pxl 3)) (if (or (= alpha 0) (= alpha -1)) t (let () ;(print "alpha: ") ;(print x) ;(print y) ;(print alpha) (set! bgpxl (cadr (gimp-drawable-get-pixel bkgnd x y))) (set! a (aref pxl 3)) (if (< a 0) (set! a (+ 256 a))) (set! r (aref pxl 0)) (if (< r 0) (set! r (+ 256 r))) (set! rb (aref bgpxl 0)) (if (< rb 0) (set! rb (+ 256 rb))) (set! g (aref pxl 1)) (if (< g 0) (set! g (+ 256 g))) (set! gb (aref bgpxl 1)) (if (< gb 0) (set! gb (+ 256 gb))) (set! b (aref pxl 2)) (if (< b 0) (set! b (+ 256 b))) (set! bb (aref bgpxl 2)) (if (< bb 0) (set! bb (+ 256 bb))) (aset pxl 0 (/ (+ (* a r) (* (- 255 a) rb)) 255)) (aset pxl 1 (/ (+ (* a g) (* (- 255 a) gb)) 255)) (aset pxl 2 (/ (+ (* a b) (* (- 255 a) bb)) 255)) (aset pxl 3 255) (gimp-drawable-set-pixel drawable x y (car pxll) pxl) ) ) (set! x (+ x 1)) ) (set! y (+ y 1)) ) ) ) (gimp-image-undo-enable image) (gimp-displays-flush) ) (script-fu-register "script-fu-smart-semiflatten" _"_Smart Semi-Flatten" "Semi flatten against a background image." "Geoffrey Hausheer" "Geoffrey Hausheer, 2005. Public Domain." "January 2005" "" SF-IMAGE"Image"0 SF-DRAWABLE "Drawable" 0 SF-LAYER"Foreground Layer" -1 SF-LAYER"Background Layer" -1 ) (script-fu-menu-register "script-fu-smart-semiflatten" "/Script-Fu/Colors") ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Position image on page
Felix Salfner wrote: I just switched from Corel PhotoPaint to the Gimp and am looking for a way to position the image on the page for printing. Within PhotoPaint, the printing dialog lets you graphically adjust the size of the image and position it on the page directly by mouse. Of course, there's also the choice to set the size to "original size" and to "center" the image. Furthermore, PhotoPaint can automatically shrink the image such that it fits the paper size. How can this be done with Gimp? I didn't find the appropriate dialog / menu. The print dialog I see in gimp allows all you've just noted. You can use the scaling slider to set the size. You can grab the actual image in the preview and drag it where you want it. There's also the 'use original image size' button just above the print button, lower right corner. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] how can you make a pie with gimp ?
Gert Cuykens wrote: i baked my self a gimp pie and i want to cut it in equall peaces how do i draw a line for example at exactly 36 degrees ? I've done this before. It may not be the best way, but what I did was simply rotate the image using the 'rotate layer' tool. You can define the exact angle of rotation. Then all you have to do is draw a horizontal or vertical line using the guides. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] import layers from other xcf
Gert Cuykens wrote: why do you use signatures in a mailing list ? it would be alot more quotomtic if everybody leave them out. Getting off topic here, I appreciate Michael's efforts, but it appears Gert is not getting it. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] import layers from other xcf
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, "Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Actually, rather than copy/pasting, with both files open it would be much faster to drag and drop layers from one to the other. Just pick the layer thumbnails on the Layers dialog, and drag them to a display of your second-image. Or drag to the toolbox to create a new image. Or, if you have GIMP 2.2, just open the second XCF from the first one using "File->Open as Layer". Time to upgrade. :) -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] import layers from other xcf
Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: On Monday 13 December 2004 08:44, Geoffrey wrote: Gert Cuykens wrote: i would like to import layers from a other xcf. how do i do that ? I'm by no means an expert and there might be a better way to do it, but what I would do is, open the second xcf file then simply copy/paste the layers you want from that xcf to the one you're working on. Actually, rather than copy/pasting, with both files open it would be much faster to drag and drop layers from one to the other. Just pick the layer thumbnails on the Layers dialog, and drag them to a display of your second-image. Or drag to the toolbox to create a new image. Like I said. :) Thanks, now I've learned something. :) -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Batch-Resizing Photos, etc.
Lyle (Hiroshi) Saxon wrote:
Greetings from Tokyo!
I've been using Linux for all of my text-based tasks for about nine
months now, but have kept an off-line W-box running with ACD-See and
PS-7 for my photo work. ACD-See (Ver.-4.0) handles most of what I need
to do with photos - mainly batch renaming, batch file type conversions,
batch rotations, and batch resizing. More than I used to, but still
only fairly rarely do I spend much time with a single photo changing
colors, and when I do, it's usually to correct the color balance of
non-flash available-light photos with wildly incorrect colors or to
slightly rotate (via free transform) photos taken slightly at an angle.
Although I've been reading things posted at this gimp user group on and
off, I'm ashamed to admit that I've only actually used gimp for the
first time this past week. From what I can see, it's able to do what I
have been doing with PS-7 for the most part, but I wasn't able to find a
function for resizing or the other things I generally do with ACD-See.
So, I want to ask if the following things can be done with gimp - help
me to finally escape from the sinister W-world! I can't keep my old
W-box running forever.
1) batch renaming
You can do this with any number of scripting languages including perl,
python and shell. I generally do it with a shell script:
You would need to offer an example of your specific needs. If I had a
bunch of files named *.JPG and wanted them changed to *.jpg, I would do:
for fn in *.JPG; do
mv $fn ${fn%JPG}jpg
done
2) batch file-type conversion
Imagemagick, specifically the 'convert' command:
convert foo.gif foo.jpg
3) batch rotations (righting vertical photos)
A combination of shell and imagemagick:
for fn in *.jpg; do
convert -rotate 90 $fn $fn
done
4) batch resizing
imagemagick:
for fn in *.jpg; do
convert -resize 50% $fn $fn
done
Also, are there any viewing options that allow for jumping from photo to
photo by using Page Up & Page Down? (I'm able to do that with GQview,
so it's not important, but if the feature exists, I'd like to try it
with gimp.)
There are various tools out there available to preview images on Linux,
you'd be best to do a bit of googling.
--
Until later, Geoffrey
___
Gimp-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] import layers from other xcf
Gert Cuykens wrote: i would like to import layers from a other xcf. how do i do that ? I'm by no means an expert and there might be a better way to do it, but what I would do is, open the second xcf file then simply copy/paste the layers you want from that xcf to the one you're working on. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Testimonials of GIMP usage by professionals
Patrick Shanahan wrote: * Gert Cuykens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [12-11-04 08:08]: i don't know ? gmail does all the quoting for me :) Yes, it quotes *everything* and *you* are _expected_ to delete that which is not necessary and/or pertinent. Agreed. Gee, just like most other mail clients. Must be an operator problem then... -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: Print command
Matthias Julius wrote: Patrick Shanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Are you trying to print from a gimp image -> File -> Print ? If so, set the print dialogue screen to your printer via the drop down box and print direct from gimp. You do not need to worry about -C name. I have an Epson sp925photo and the print-command which gimp selects for my printer is: lp -s -desp925gp -oraw If this is *not* what you are trying to do, please explain further. Yes I am printing from the Gimp print dialog. And changing the printer in the printer setup does not affect the print command Gimp is choosing. And it is printing fine as I wrote in my original post. The only problem I have is that in the print job list every print job from Gimp has the name '(stdin)'. I would like the name of the printed file to appear there and from the lpr side this is done via the '-C' option. Now I need Gimp to insert the file name into the print command. So the print command specification in the printer setup should be something like 'lpr -C $filename' where Gimp is replacing $filename with the actual file name. BTW, I am printing through CUPS. I don't know whether CUPS' lpr differs from standard lpr. If in fact GIMP is printing via stdin, there will not be a file name associated. I suspect that you'll be out of luck as GIMP is probably not 'aware' of the file name at this point. After all, it may not even have a file name if you've just created the image. This is all speculation, thus you should likely wait to hear from someone who really knows. :) Matthias ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Re: Print command
Patrick Shanahan wrote: * Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [11-22-04 19:18]: I know 'man lpr'. It says: -C name Sets the job name. But how can I get gimp to include the file name in the print command after the -C? Are you trying to print from a gimp image -> File -> Print ? If so, set the print dialogue screen to your printer via the drop down box and print direct from gimp. You do not need to worry about -C name. I have an Epson sp925photo and the print-command which gimp selects for my printer is: lp -s -desp925gp -oraw If this is *not* what you are trying to do, please explain further. He wants to set the job name via -C: From man lpr: -C nameSets the job name. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] renaming the gimp
Gezim Hoxha wrote: Hi all, I find the name GIMP not very attractive and I think if we want to market the GIMP we need to do something about this name (i.e. change it). I have friends ask me "What program is that?" and the when they hear "GIMP" it doesn't sound good, and it's hard to remember. So what do YOU think, does the GIMP need a name change? I'm perfectly happy with the name. -- Until later, Geoffrey ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Image Cutter
Tony Wu wrote: Hi, I am new to Gimp, I like to know that is there a function or plug-in to cut image & generate html table code? Right click on the image, from that menu: Filters->Web->Perl-o-tine -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Text tool problem
Balas Mark wrote: Hi! I have just started to use Gimp 2.0.5, under Mandrake Linux 10.0. I have a really serious problem with the text tool. If I do the following: 1. Start Gimp 2. Create a new image 3. Select the text tool 4. Click on the new image 5. Start typing any text Both the image window and Gimp closes without any warning after the first 1 to 3 letters. The text I type do not appear in the "word processing" window. Long shot here, but was the 'word processing' window the current window? Or was it possible that GIMP was picking up what you were typing and took it as some command, say exit?? -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] keybinding for File->Open Location [was: Gimp 2.1.4 filepicker]
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Geoffrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Well, rarely use keybindings. That being said, I can see the need to 'coexist,' but I really have a hard time understanding 'Open Location.' It sounds like I'm trying to open a web page. Personally, I open files. It is exactly for that purpose, to open a remote URL. It allows you to enter for example "http://gimp.org/images/wilber_the_gimp2.png"; and have GIMP (or rather the wget plug-in) download the image for you. Well, don't I feel stupid. :) Thanks for turning the light on in my darkness.. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] keybinding for File->Open Location [was: Gimp 2.1.4 filepicker]
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Simon Budig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I frequently use CTRL-L to bring the layers tab to the front, it is a handy shortcut. Of course it is a very useful shortcut and I use it a lot myself. However if we want to try to coexist peacefully with other applications, it would make sense to respect the fact that Ctrl-L is a standard keybinding that should be bound to "Open Location" in all applications. The question is thus if we can find a different keybinding for the Layers dialog. Well, rarely use keybindings. That being said, I can see the need to 'coexist,' but I really have a hard time understanding 'Open Location.' It sounds like I'm trying to open a web page. Personally, I open files. So, what other packages use this binding? -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dpi from 75 -> 300 ??
Sven Neumann wrote: Unless you disable "Dot-for-Dot" in the GIMP's image window (it's in the View menu), you will always see one pixel of the image taking up one pixel on screen (of course only in 1:1 zoom ratio). The dpi setting is irrelevant for the image display. It becomes of importance if you want to use the rulers or the measure tool with real-world units. Then GIMP needs to know how large a pixel will end up on the final print or projection or whatever your final media is. Changing the dpi setting alone won't alter your pixel data. It's just some meta information. Even if you disable dot-for-dot view in GIMP, the dpi information is only used in the display routines. Your pixel data is not change Thanks for the insites Sven. I had seen the dot-for-dot option, but didn't really know what it was for. So, if I understand you correctly, by opening a file and setting the dpi from 75 to 300 and then saving it really hasn't changed anything? -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dpi from 75 -> 300 ??
Carol Spears wrote: On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 01:39:09PM -0700, Carol Spears wrote: On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 02:22:24PM -0400, Geoffrey wrote: So here's a question which will demonstrate my ignorance. I've got some digital photos I took that, when opened with GIMP are identified as being 75dpi x72dpi. I need images that are 300 dpi, so is it possible to convert the 75dpi image to 300 dpi?? I selected to scale the image and happened to notice that I can make this change at this point. Is this doing what I'm expecting? open up one of the images in gimp and tell how many pixels each image has in its width and height. okay, i am replying to my own posting, and there is some rule against this, i am fairly certain. i would really like to know how many pixels you are working with. please? Oops, I missed your post. Either I didn't get it or it's buried in my inbox. Sorry.. :( These are 3 meg images, from a 3.2 megapixel camera. 2048x1536. Found your previous posting, somehow ended up filed in a totally unrelated folder. Must have moved it accidentally. Now to figure out what I MEANT to move there -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dpi from 75 -> 300 ??
BandiPat wrote: On Monday 13 September 2004 02:22 pm, Geoffrey wrote: So here's a question which will demonstrate my ignorance. I've got some digital photos I took that, when opened with GIMP are identified as being 75dpi x72dpi. I need images that are 300 dpi, so is it possible to convert the 75dpi image to 300 dpi?? I selected to scale the image and happened to notice that I can make this change at this point. Is this doing what I'm expecting? ===== Geoffrey, In the last Linux Journal magazine, October 2004, Issue 126, there is a wonderful article on Gimp and using it for professional photography! One of the best articles I've read and more than helpful and encouraging about the abilities of Gimp. The article itself is not online, but the resources are listed there. The author, RW Hawkins, has his site there as well and would be very helpful should you have detailed questions. I subscribe, but have not had a chance to check it out, I'll do that, thanks. That's not to say people on this list are not just as qualified to answer you, because they are! I just thought this might be of some interest to you and others, since you brought up digital photos and I know there is a lot of interest about that and the Gimp's ability to work with them effectively. Thanks again. Here is your resources site: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=7704 Hope that helps and if you don't have a copy of the mag, go get one, it's a nice article for info and on the Gimp! I do subscribe, but I'm a bit behind on my reading. :( -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dpi from 75 -> 300 ??
William Skaggs wrote: Geoffrey wrote: So here's a question which will demonstrate my ignorance. I've got some digital photos I took that, when opened with GIMP are identified as being 75dpi x72dpi. I need images that are 300 dpi, so is it possible to convert the 75dpi image to 300 dpi?? I selected to scale the image and happened to notice that I can make this change at this point. Is this doing what I'm expecting? That is a question that only a mind reader can answer. (Sorry :-)) Good point. The request I received was to provide an image that was 4"x5" at 300 dpi, thus I chose option #2 below, which did give me what I want, I guess. :) I say that because the image size (as in WxH) was dramatically reduced when I changed the dpi, which makes sense. I'm just not sure that this change is 'part of the image,' or was this just an example the guy was giving me? In other words, was I wasting my time changing the dpi and then saving the file. Did I change anything? It appears not, based on your next paragraph. Here's the thing: a resolution in dpi is not a property of the image per se, it's a property of the way the image is displayed, on the screen or on paper. When you see a resolution of 72x72 dpi for an image, what those numbers represent is somebody's judgement that the image will look good when displayed with 72 pixels per inch; and usually this means "look good when displayed on a monitor", because nothing looks very good when it is printed at 72 dots per inch. Now suppose you have a 300 x 300 pixel image, with a nominal resolution of 72 dpi, and suppose you want to convert it to 300 dpi for printing. There are two approaches you could take. (Actually more, but let's keep it simple for the moment.) (1) You caould say, okay, 300 pixels is about 4 inches at 72 dpi. I want my print to have the same size. So, I will scale the image to 1200 x 1200 pixels, and set the resolution to 300 dpi. (2) You could say, okay, I don't want to make the image look blurry by scaling up the number of pixels, so I will simply set the resolution to 300 dpi without changing the pixel dimensions, thereby getting a print about 1 inch across. Both of these are legitimate choices, and so are many others. The best way to do it depends on your image and your printer. What makes it complicated is the fact that printer dots have much poorer color resolution than monitor dots. On most modern systems, a monitor dot encodes 24 bits of color information. On a typical high-quality printer, a single dot encodes about 6 bits of color information. Thus, simply changing the resolution so that a single monitor dot becomes a single printer dot is usually not the best thing to do. The actual image is going to a professional shop to be placed in an ad. Thanks for your feedback. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] dpi from 75 -> 300 ??
So here's a question which will demonstrate my ignorance. I've got some digital photos I took that, when opened with GIMP are identified as being 75dpi x72dpi. I need images that are 300 dpi, so is it possible to convert the 75dpi image to 300 dpi?? I selected to scale the image and happened to notice that I can make this change at this point. Is this doing what I'm expecting? -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp2 file selectors
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Geoffrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I must respectfully disagree, as a GIMP user, I am most definitely interested in the reason for the change. It may be that I am a developer as well, that prompts me to want to know, but the bottom line is, any time a change is made that seems to be less intuitive (to me), I'm going to wonder and inquire why the change was made. Well, the answer has been given here multiple times already. You did read the relevant threads that have been linked from this thread as well as the design spec that I mentioned yesterday? The answer is in their. Yes, I did and I do understand the reasoning. I was addressing your statement that: 'It doesn't change the point though that whatever answer was given to whatever GIMP developer about the rationales of the design of the new file chooser widget is not a question that is interesting to our users,' Which I disagreed with. Unfortunately in your followup, you neglected to have it as a part of your response. So much for the reasoning behind the design of the GtkFileChooser. I appreciate you restating the reasoning, but that was not the issue in the post you responded. I know we have beat this to death, but all I'm trying to say is that I believe Carol had a valid question which was not properly, professionally answered. Since I don't use the 2.1 series, I wouldn't see the change until it shows up in 2.2, thus I think it's a good thing that she brought it up. I try to stay on top of these kind of issues, but GIMP is not a tool I use terribly often. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp2 file selectors
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Manish Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: And it is, when it boils down to it, a cop out fluff answer. Which is Carol's point, that it was a non-answer, and that she expected a better answer, more from a technical perspective. Sure. We all understood this already. It doesn't change the point though that whatever answer was given to whatever GIMP developer about the rationales of the design of the new file chooser widget is not a question that is interesting to our users, I must respectfully disagree, as a GIMP user, I am most definitely interested in the reason for the change. It may be that I am a developer as well, that prompts me to want to know, but the bottom line is, any time a change is made that seems to be less intuitive (to me), I'm going to wonder and inquire why the change was made. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp2 file selectors
Manish Singh wrote: On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 09:55:59PM +0200, David Neary wrote: Getting something to the stage "where my grandmother would use it" is a proverbial way of describing making technology accessible to a larger public. I am sure this was the sense in which Luis was talking when he said he wanted something his mother could use. That is not the reason things are simplified, but it is a soundbite describing the general goal of opening things up to a larger public. And it is, when it boils down to it, a cop out fluff answer. Which is Carol's point, that it was a non-answer, and that she expected a better answer, more from a technical perspective. This is the essence of the whole issue. The bottom line is, Carol, or anyone else for that matter, deserved a real answer. Perhaps the assumption that making technology accessible to a larger, untrained public should be revisited. There wouldn't be spam if nobody bought from spammers. True. You're not going to please everyone, so you've got to target SOME audience. For example, a reasonable question regarding the change is: will this change benefit the majority of the user base? Sure, it's more complicated then that.. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp2 file selectors
Carol Spears wrote: On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 09:28:55PM +0200, Simon Budig wrote: You have yet to explain what is so bad to design a file selector so that Luis' mother can use it. I think this is a great goal (although the GTK+ developers did overshot a bit, hampering the usability for computer-savvy people). And since GUI design and usability is not a pure "technical" topic the illustrative answer "it was designed so that my mother can use" is a perfectly valid answer. There very well might be no answer that suits your implied "technical" request. http://carol.gimp.org/gimp/basics/gui/fileselector/index.html http://carol.gimp.org/gimp/basics/gui/fileselector/console.html After reviewing the change, I agree it is for the worse. I was quite pleased when I stumbled on the tab completion in the GIMP. I much prefer the older flavor which includes the tab completion as well as the drop down directory selection. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp2 file selectors
Simon Budig wrote: Hi Carol. Carol Spears ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: [...] i really am responsible to a whole bunch of people who contributed time and money to send me to a developer meeting in which i was told by luis, representing ximian, that the changes were made for his mom. for shame. I start to regret to have supported your attendance to Guadec. The fuzz you make about this obviously casual and illustrative remark by Luis is annoying and does not at all help with the necessary improvements to the file selector. In fact it even is counterproductive. Very much so. I would counter that Luis' answer was neither casual nor illustrative. A question was asked and either a insulting inaccurate answer was provide, or worse, a poor change in the toolkit was made for entirely the wrong reason. And you'd do yourself and your credibility a favor if you'd treat personal emails with respect and not publish them on mailinglists. I would agree to some extent, although as a long time user of GIMP, I think this list deserves to know the reason for the change. I've not seen it pass the list as of yet. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp tool kit
Carol Spears wrote: hi, dunno if this is all that interesting to the people interesting in using the gimp. i do know that i got to go to a developers meeting due to the interest and donations of a lot of interested parties and i am so so honored to be allowed to represent such a smart and decent group of human beings. miguel i think is in charge of ximian who is making changes to the gimptool kit that are, well, even the reason they give is fairly idiotic. they gave me an idiotic reason and then started to be rude to me and give me a real disrespectful runaround which has now ended up here; on this list where probably many of the contributors to my trip to the developers meeting are. I personally feel Miguel owes you and the GIMP community a reasonable explanation of the reason for these changes. since miguel is too busy and not involved to tell me who he is, i have googled around and come up with an introduction to the man behind the men who are making the decisions about what the gimp tool kit widgets do and why: here is miguel sucking up at a microsoft thing: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2003/07/10/photos1.html?page=14 I find this a bit disturbing. I've always had concerns regarding Mono, now wonder if Miguel's true purpose of Mono. I've never thought it was a very good idea to build something based on a Microsoft technology. sorry he did not have time to return the "who are you" request i made several weeks ago, however the web presence i was able to find is probably certainly more entertaining. To be sure. :) miguel is quite famous in the linux world, btw. there is a big article (and important as well, in my world at least) entitled "Sellout or Savior" http://www.technologyreview.com//articles/04/09/freedman0904.asp An article worth the read. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995 ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Working on multiple files
khiraly wrote:
Hi!
What is the simplest way, to do the following day to day job?:
Open 20-40 files at 2592x1944 resolution, and rescal to 1024*768 and
save in .jpg with specific options(progressiv, floating, etc). But all
the image with the same option.
The history:
My camera(Canon ps G5) save 3 time bigger .jpg as Gimp.
So the rescaling from software(Gimp) work better, as the algorithm in my
camera (hardware way).
Imagemagik is your friend, something like:
Place all the files in the same directory, cd to that directory and:
for fn in *; do
convert -geom 1024x768 $fn new-${fn}
done
Check the man page for imagemagik and convert to see how to add the
other touches you want (specific options).
The other job:
My friend have made a website using photoshop. And for my advice she
have saved as .png.
But in IE does not show correctly (the colour not the same)
And the result is ugly. The paintShop pro have too a fault. Just Gimp
save the .png what IE can display correct.
So the job is the following:
Open 54 .png images and do the following:
File->save
Manually is really slow.
You should likely be able to do this with imagemagik as well, but I'm
not sure what the problem is, or whether you'll see any difference.
--
Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567
AT&T Certified UNIX System Programmer - 1995
___
Gimp-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Quality of animated gif is bad
Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, Tom Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: True, but it's still widely used and has more support than PNG. It's the perennial web designer's nightmare - you hate IE but you have to code for it anyway because everyone uses it. The compromise between what should be done and what has to be done. In the same way, PNG is not as widely and well-supported as it should be, at least in IE. Sort of true but things will never change if everyone thinks and acts this way. Only if you web-designers start to write spec-compliant pages and use the proper formats, only then will the browsers be fixed to render these pages correctly. Go a step further. When you identify a browser that does not support current standards (typically, IE), let the user know, either with a popup or such. How many times have you seen similar messages telling you, you MUST use IE for a particular website? -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 Building secure systems in spite of Microsoft ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] gimpperl with perl 2.0?
I thought I caught a posting regarding this issue, but can't seem to locate it in the archives. I've just upgraded gimp to 2.0.2 on SuSE 9.1. SuSE 9.1 did not come with a gimpperl and I'm unable to locate such an animal. Anyone have any insights? Thanks. -- Until later, Geoffrey Registered Linux User #108567 Building secure systems in spite of Microsoft ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
