On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 08:24:59 -0800, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 02:35:51PM +0530, Laxminarayan Kamath wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:31:35 -0800, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 10:59:39AM +1300, Joseph Heled wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In 2.2, the histogram always takes the full image. I thought that in the
> > > > past it took the selection if there was one. Am I imagining this? Is
> > > > there
> > > > a way to get the histogram for just the selection?
> > > >
> > > it is easy enough to make a new layer of the selection and work the
> > > histogram bearing tools on this.
> > Unless u r working on a huuuuuge image.... like me and many of my freinds
> > do.
> at the point that you actually start to work on huge images, you might
> notice that a new layer is always always easier than working on a
> so many of the selection tricks were added to gimp so that the
> photoshopusers wouldnt notice the change over and because gimp can do
> them, however, anyone who has actually stressed their computer out with
> huuuuuge images will certainly be able to tell you that working on
> selections is the least efficient way to handle an image with gimp.
Yeah. i was saying from my frenz' point o view.. They aree photoshop addicts :(
Laxminarayan Kamath Ammembal
MithraKoota, Bhoja Rao Lane,
(+91) 9845 061385
Gimp-developer mailing list