Ernst Lippe wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:12:14 +0100
Raphaël Quinet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:38:13 +0100, Ernst Lippe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:46:49 +
Adam D. Moss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that the user should be able to edit the alpha
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 06:36:47PM +0100, Sven Neumann wrote:
which operation (besides the evil anti-erase) wouldn't have such a
color information? The only operation I can think of that makes a
transparent pixel non-transparent is some sort of painting with one of
the
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 10:15:51AM -0800, Daniel Rogers wrote:
Alpha is a measure of the amount of coverage of the pixel. (e.g. an
alpha of .5 means half the pixel is covered). In particular, 0 alpha
means that the pixel is not covered at all. This means
Would just antierase users be happy with layers masks? This feature is
ignored a lot, and I think it does the same, you hide and unhide areas
as you want, keeping the colour info. If yes, get rid of antierase.
GSR
Or, as I suggested in an earlier email, but I don't think was stated
very
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 11:41:30AM -0800, Daniel Rogers wrote:
Weight the pixel value by the alpha value, just like you do with any
other operation on pixels. This makes sense when alpha is defined to be
the coverage. If a pixel is only really half covered
Adam D. Moss wrote:
In addition to alpha (the measure of coverage) you could also
include transparency (which is something a measure of how much
light passes through, i.e. the actual transparency of glass, as
opposed the the coverage of a screen, this is equivilent to
insisting on a layer mask to
Simon Budig wrote:
Sorry, this is a step back towards Gimp 0.54 where you had no embedded
alpha channel in the images and compositing of two images (that had to
have the same size) was done via a third grayscale image (that also had
to have the same size).
I am not suggesting that alpha is gotten
Simon Budig wrote:
Sorry, this is a step back towards Gimp 0.54 where you had no embedded
alpha channel in the images and compositing of two images (that had to
have the same size) was done via a third grayscale image (that also had
to have the same size).
Incidentally, this is precisely what
David Necas (Yeti) wrote:
If you want to implement anti-erase as a layer mask, then
for antierase to be available, this layer mask (not shown to
user) has to be present all the time (if not, the
information needed for anti-erase would be lost).
But how this situation differs from separate alpha
David Necas (Yeti) wrote:
OK, I could use alpha in a wrong sense, it's a matter of
definition, and let's agree on yours (though I wonder how's
called the object alpha==0 pixels are part of, because
I can draw on them, unlike pixels outside layer boundaries,
so they exist and are part of
Simon Budig wrote:
Sorry, but I don't believe that this destinction would make sense.
From my point of view transparency/opacity and coverage are two
models to explain what happens when talking about alpha. I do know that
the original Porter Duff paper based its conclusions on the coverage
model,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
Damien Genet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why can't you launch a « Gimp Fund » through paypal, like the Blender
foundation did ? I think that the Gimp has much more visibility than
Blender did, and would have no problems raising money. Actually, it may
even help to boost
Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
At 11:42 PM -0700 8/13/03, Manish Singh wrote:
GEGL uses XYZ as a native format.
Why? Lab is a richer model esp. for handling chromanicity and is
also a standard in the print world natively. Why limit to XYZ??
I am not sure what you mean by a richer model.
NPO assests must be sold to another
public-benefit NPO, so a hostile takeover of an NPO isn't really
possible.
--
Daniel Rogers
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Has anyone else noticed how the [EMAIL PROTECTED] spam is getting a little
out of hand? perhaps now would be a good time to change that address.
- --
Dan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla
David Neary wrote:
You probably see that I had anticipated doing a release tomorrow
(as anticipated at camp) as a prelude to a bug week... I just had
a look, and make distcheck just failed on me in the po files, so
I'm going to need to look more closely at that, and might not
have a release until
Sven Neumann wrote:
Don't get me wrong. I think your schedule is reasonable and we should
definitely publish a roadmap but IMO it shouldn't include any dates.
what about sufficiently vague date?
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tino Schwarze wrote:
| Hi there,
|
| I'd just like to say: Well done. I managed to create a A1 poster at 600
| dpi - a whopping 1.1 Gig of picture data (about 2x14000 pixels).
| While GIMP 1.2.4 crashed while rendering the fractal, GIMP 1.3.20
|
Steve Crane wrote:
Hi,
Are there any built-in functions or scripts for the GIMP that can be
used to remove or reduce noise in digital photographs? Does anyone have
a set of steps to follow to remove noise? There are several stand-alone
programs available for Windows that do this but I haven't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I am not subscribed to gimp-web, so if you are only replying to that
address, I won't get the message
As was discussed at Gimp Con 2003 (and before, frankly) I am in the
process of incorporating The GIMP Foundation as a non-profit
organization devoted
Sven Neumann wrote:
This sounds a lot more like an attempt to bring WilberWorks
Wilber what? I plead ignorant.
back to
life than what I was imaging from such a foundation. IMO it should be
a lot less commercially oriented but maybe I am only getting a wrong
impression from looking at this list.
Also,
I fear my first email may have been a bit to rambling to be able to actually get my point
across.
What I am hoping to discover by encourging this conversation is what ways people would
like to help with TGF and in what ways people would like to see TGF help them.
I would also like to
Carol Spears wrote:
When I looked into this sometime back, I watched the gnome foundation
elections on the irc. This is probably not the best view of a
foundation, however, I really wanted nothing to do with it.
We don't need to structure our Foundation (or even have membership) if we don't want
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Neumann wrote:
| Thanks a lot for organizing this.
you're welcome.
- --
Dan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
For those of you who were wondering why you couldn't verify my
signiture: there you are.
I had forgotten this problem existed. Thanks, John, for informing me of
this.
John Dietsch wrote:
| Daniel, Where is your public key? I can't verify your
Piotr Legiecki wrote:
Hello Guys,
For a long time we were waiting for GIMP to become a real pro tool for
serious photographers. The scarcity of well designed tools for UNIX is
obvious. What *have to be* changed as soon as possible:
1) Levels dialog - *linear* histogram as in histogram
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Neumann wrote:
| Hi,
|
| Piotr Legiecki [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
|
|1) Levels dialog - *linear* histogram as in histogram tool.
|
|
| I've done some changes and the histogram scale is now part of the
| tool-options of all tools that use a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Evening GIMPers,
Gimp is going to COMDEX. I just found out that I would be able to go
tonight. Now I am kinda panicing about the kind of things I should
present. Here are some quick ideas, before I go to sleep. If anyone
has anything in particular
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Here is my defense of carol's arguments.
1. Yosh is pretty darn right about who did what with regard to COMDEX.
2. I don't feel a need to justify my role here in this community to you.
~ Especially since no one else seems to mind my commitment.
3.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
| Am 18.11.03, 22:49 +0100 schrieb Sven Neumann:
|
|
|correction filters. If these plug-ins and modules all use lcms and
|share ICC profiles by means of gimprc and parasites, you could use
|
|
| Have gimps configure an header
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
| Am 20.11.03, 21:10 -0800 schrieb Daniel Rogers:
|
|
|I am working on an api for this in GEGL. It is probably best to use the
|system api's, when available, since there are already methods to plug
|lcms into the exisiting
GSR - FR wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2003-11-21 at 0834.36 +0100):
This would be fine for unix based systems too. Are there any plans to
create an system interface for X to plug-in an CMM?
Do You know someone allready working on this?
apropos Xcms should give you some man pages, here it does. If
David Neary wrote:
Hi all,
Following up from the mail last week discussing the date and
location of GIMPCon, here's the state of play on the various
possibilities discussed.
1) GUADEC: The GNOME crowd are delighted to have us, the guadec
planning committee are very eager, and are now planning a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
| Hi,
|
| Am 27.11.03, 13:42 +0100 schrieb Sven Neumann:
|
|
|There is no way a GIMP plug-in can support multiple versions and even
|a completely different app and at the same time be readable and
|maintainable code. In my
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tor Lillqvist wrote:
| Tor Lillqvist writes:
| Possibly the lcms.dll in the lcms11.zip file isn't suitable as such
| to be used from GIMP, but will have to be rebuilt from source.
|
| Yes, that seems to be the case. I don't know the technical
Michael Graff wrote:
But, will the list maintainer PLEASE remove me? I have followed the http
links in the headers. I have mailed the email addresses in them. I have
mailed [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have gotten no replies, or
results.
You are forgivin. Our lists have been broken for some time.
Daniel Rogers wrote:
Michael Graff wrote:
But, will the list maintainer PLEASE remove me? I have followed the
http links in the headers. I have mailed the email addresses in
them. I have mailed [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have gotten
no replies, or results.
You are forgivin. Our lists have
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
OK, the prerelease is out and the first bugs were found and fixed.
After the prerelease is before the prerelease. We still have about 70
bugs on the 2.0 milestone. Our goal should now be to target this list.
Not all these bugs need to be fixed before 2.0. A few,
Jakub Friedl (listy) wrote:
it would be nice. btw, how far is the gegl development? when we can
expect gegl based release of gimp to be made? 2005?
I have been working on the pixel access stuff, some ICC colorspace
classes using lcms, and some swap stuff. That should be done in a few
weeks.
Daniel Rogers wrote:
Hopefully it won't be that long to a next stable release of gimp. It
would be nice to see it in 2004 (albeit late 2004).
I have been asked to point out that is is my opinion and noone has made
any specific plans. (From talking with other open source projects, 9-12
month
Sven Neumann wrote:
All of this would probably be best solved by redoing Script-Fu using a
full-featured and actively maintained Scheme implementation.
Might I suggest Guile?
http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/guile.html
It seems almost ready made to be stuck into the gimp.
--
Dan
Simon Budig wrote:
Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 05:30:19PM -0600, Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know any good reasons why Guile would be an inappropriate
choice for replacing SIOD?
As far as I remember, it was because it adds a rather big
There has also been discussion about some MDI type interface,
although the main developers seem dead against it, mainly on account
of that they feel this is something that should be solved using the
window manager, not the application.
Please note that GIMP does MDI (multiple document
On Feb 25, 2004, at 2:12 PM, Daniel Egger wrote:
On Feb 25, 2004, at 10:11 am, Sven Neumann wrote:
Did you increase the shared memory limit? I am not sure what happens
if it the X server hits the limit but I guess it just silently stops
allocating more shared memory.
Err, I know somewhat how to
Daniel Egger wrote:
On Feb 25, 2004, at 11:27 pm, Daniel Rogers wrote:
sysctl -w kern.sysv.shmmax=41943040
sysctl -w kern.sysv.shmmin=1
sysctl -w kern.sysv.shmmni=320
sysctl -w kern.sysv.shmseg=80
sysctl -w kern.sysv.shmall=10240
DUH! How could I possibly forget about sysctl. That doesn't
seem
On Mar 8, 2004, at 8:25 AM, Kelly Martin wrote:
Dave Neary wrote:
Daniel Rogers wrote:
Avoid self-dealing.
What's this?
Self-dealing is whenever the people who control the organization
command the organization to do business with themselves in their
personal capacity. Self-dealing tears
Hello again,
It has been awhile since I have done a GIMP Foundation update. There
is quite a bit that must be decided on at this point. Also, people need
to decide how invovled they would like to be.
Summary:
My Goals,
Benefits of incorporation
responsibilites of those invovled
things to be
Here is few notes to address a few more concerns I have encountered,
I'll pose them retorically.
1. I heard that some people have been asked to be on the board, why
weren't the developers consulted? I'm a developer, why wasn't I asked?
Who are these board members?
In California every corporation
Nathan Carl Summers wrote:
Is this required to be in person, or is conference call/irc/email/etc
sufficient? Furthermore, is it possible for board members to be
reimbursed for expenses? I can see this being a major obstacle for non-us
residents otherwise.
Kelly already answered the first part,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Gianluca,
This question has really nothing to do with Gimp unless you want
to use already existing gimp functionality.
You may e.g. read an image into memory though the gdk_pixbuf
functions, and then access the pixel data through gdk_pixbuf_get_buf().
Working with
So,
More details have come forward about the Mark Shuttleworth offer. Mark
Shuttleworth made up his mind and decided to fund myself and Calvin to
work on GEGL and GIMP/GEGL integration. Until today, I didn't have any
specific details on the offer.
I am pretty sure the offer essentially the
Raphaël Quinet wrote:
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:38:55 -0800, Daniel Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More details have come forward about the Mark Shuttleworth offer. Mark
Shuttleworth made up his mind and decided to fund myself and Calvin to
work on GEGL and GIMP/GEGL integration. Until today, I
Kelly Martin wrote:
Dave Neary wrote:
We could even consider having a quickish stable release after 2.2 with
just GeglImage replacing GimpLayer, which would give us a chance to
work out any wrinkles in that milestone before we start really relying
on it...
Unless the code has changed a lot
Michael Natterer wrote:
Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We could even consider having a quickish stable release after 2.2 with
just GeglImage replacing GimpLayer, which would give us a chance to
work out any wrinkles in that milestone before we start really relying
on it...
GeglImage
Michael Natterer wrote:
Actually no. GimpDrawable is a GimpItem is a GimpObject. It should
*have* a GeglImage, not be one.
Damn it. yes. I meant delagation, not inheritance.
--
Dan
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thomas Lübking wrote:
Hi.
After checking the i18n files i now know that nachbelichten is supposed to
be burn.
However, the appropriate function in app/coposite-generic.c does not seem to
behave as expected.
afaik the burn function should do nothing if the the upper (the burning) color
is white.
Hi again,
I have almost completed all the paperwork to get The GIMP Foundation up
and running. The last slightly compliciated bit left is to get the
bylaws finished.
I have a draft version of the bylaws that need a few gaps filled in.
I've put it here: http://www.phasevelocity.org/bylaws.doc
Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
On Friday 23 April 2004 18:39, Alan Horkan wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/23/forgent_jpeg_suit/
Has the issue of Jpeg Patents been brought up yet?
(a quick but not thorough search suggests not)
hmmm...What about waiting until october, and THEM start the
Dave Neary wrote:
Hi all,
In a mail I just sent off, I said we should have some information about
what we plan to do at GIMPCon...
What do we plan to do at GIMPCon?
I'd like to say that, for the record I won't be able to attend GimpCon.
I simply don't have the time or money at the moment (and
Daniel Rogers wrote:
So, I noticed the resounding silence surrounding this thread. Is anyone
still interested in a foundation? I went into this foundation thing
thinking I had support from the community. I cannot do this all by
myself. The Foundation is about getting involved. If noone
Michael Schumacher wrote:
Daniel Rogers wrote:
Daniel Rogers wrote:
So, I noticed the resounding silence surrounding this thread. Is
anyone still interested in a foundation? I went into this foundation
thing thinking I had support from the community. I cannot do this all
by myself
Ok,
So I think the best way to approach this is to break the bylaws in to
the relevent bits and encourage discussion on a single small topic at a
time.
So, the first part that needs to be discussed are the objectives.
These are, in their way, rather important. The objectives are what
define
Michael Schumacher wrote:
Carol Spears wrote:
On Sat, Apr 24, 2004 at 09:44:49AM +0200, Marc A. Lehmann wrote:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 08:00:17PM -0700, Daniel Rogers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've put it here: http://www.phasevelocity.org/bylaws.doc These bylaws
Woaw, the bylaws
Sven Neumann wrote:
It's not that we wouldn't put a lot of effort into making GIMP work
well on a GNOME desktop. Adhering to FreeDesktop standards is one of
our goals and we are even working towards full GNOME HIG compliance.
The only things we really want to avoid is to be forced to do any of
Kelly Martin wrote:
I'd be very surprised if the GNOME Foundation passed along *all* funds
untouched donated with a simple earmark for the GIMP to the GIMP people;
I would fully expect them to take an administrative fee of between 5%
and 50% (maybe even more). You might want to have an
65 matches
Mail list logo
