I apologize if this goes out twice. I believe my first effort bounced.

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Liam R E Quin <l...@holoweb.net> wrote:

> It's usually better just to have an opaque signature: it's harder to
> remove and can become a part of the artwork.
Browsing and reading this I'm reminded of my problem w/signature brush.
years ago, I made a brush by signing my name in black ink onto a white
paper and
scanning that paper.  I use it unobtrusively in bottom right corner when I
print photos
to frame for gallery showings.  The problem is this:  I can't remember how
I made the
background transparent.   I have about 12 sig brushes which are no good
with all of them, I used an eraser to get the white background off --
messy.  I know there is
a good method of doing this -- I did it years ago -- but I've tried many
times over many
months, and can't recall how I made the signature black with transparent
Does my question make sense?  How is that done?  (The brush I made
has my name with 2008, and I just erase the date every time I use it, but
I'd like to
know how to do it again and do it right.)

Helen Etters
using Linux, suse 12
gimp-user-list mailing list

Reply via email to