On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 03:44:51PM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 05:24:20PM -0400, "Garry R. Osgood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > a clear statement that Gimp is an unmultiplied compositor (though
> > certain tools and plug-ins necessarily have to internally play the
> > premultiplied game - blur comes to mind) and (c) If you care about
> While this might be interesting from a technical perspectibve, since
> both compositors must result in the same image,
In Gary's defense, I am not yet convinced this is true. Plug-ins do not
have access to GIMP's rendering pipeline, really (except the selection
mask is handled for them), so they implement compositing functions in
any way they choose. However, for functions such as the blend tool,
there's a strong pressure to use the existing gimp_image pipeline.
Now I am a plug-in guy, and thus not at all familiar with the paint
core, but in my preliminary investigation I found no clean way for the
blend tool to do premultiplied compositing.
I await with much anticipation to see how Federico gets it done.
Kevin Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | OpenPGP encryption welcome here
Plug-ins: They make GIMP do stuff. http://gimp-plug-ins.sourceforge.net/
This list is archived at http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=gimp-developer
To unsubscribe, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]