.. I replied to the wrong address again; argh.

On 6/24/06, David Gowers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 6/23/06, Gerald Friedland < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I do not quite understand your problems.  I am an aloof developer who
has serious problems to understand user's problems. Please help me
out, maybe I am misunderstanding something? So please do not get me
wrong here.

What one defines foreground or background is not a matter of the tool
but a matter of the human being who is using the tool.

 

If you want to have the screen-background instead of the windows, use
"select/invert" and you get the background instead of the
foreground...

 As far as I know, foreground and background are still objectively different from the computer's point of view and our point of view; they have different characteristics. A background tends to
be less detailed than a foreground; also, the definition of background is further muddied by the possibility of having multiple overlapping objects at different depths.

You clearly understand the tool(and maybe the algorithym too) better than I.
However, my basic point is that 'what is not foreground' may mean something quite different from 'what is background'; the only case in which this will be false is when all objects are all at the same depth.



_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to