Re: [Gimp-user] strange brush behavior

[Ken Tanaka]

This sounds like the type of problem when there is a bug in the graphic 
driver software for your graphics card (hardware). Does this happen in 
other programs, especially other graphics programs? An updated driver 
might fix this. There may be other causes too.

-Ken
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] 300 dpi screen capture

[Ken Tanaka]

I would say that it's widely accepted that if you are including an image 
in a book that represents a screen shot that is less than full screen, 
you will magnify the image and use blocky pixel replication for text or 
line graphics, and interpolated zooms for photographic subjects. I think 
the readers will understand and be OK with that.

If your topic is vector graphic based, such as PDF or SVG, then it may 
be reasonable to zoom your area of interest to a nice full screen smooth 
and sharp image for screen shots, but you have to be careful not to 
misrepresent what you are doing to the reader.

There is a screen that's close to 300dpi, but it's only about an inch 
across on my iPod ;-), so I don't expect that to help.

-Ken

ChadDavis wrote:
> But doesn't this mean that if my the portion of the screen that I'm 
> interested in is only 3 by 5 or so, then there is basically no way to 
> get a non extrapolated set of pixels that will print to 3 by 5 on the 
> page?
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Michael J. Hammel 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 23:41 +0100, Daniel Hornung wrote:
> > But maybe one of the
> > actual book writers on this list may tell you more. *hint*
>
> I guess that's my cue.  :-)
>
> The screen resolution is in pixels.  One pixel = one dot.  Most
> monitors
> give you between 72 and 100 DPI, or dots per inch.  You'll notice that
> you have a monitor that is 15"-24" inches across depending on how they
> measure such things.  So you have 72*15 = 1080 dots across the screen
> for the 15" monitor.  Now how do you convert that to printing for a
> book?
>
> Well, in the book you want the same image but at a smaller size.  A
> typical book is likely less than a typical piece of paper (around
> 8.5").
> In fact, the actual image size is likely to be around 2"-4"
> across.  So
> what DPI do you need to squeeze 1080 dots into (splitting the
> difference) 3"?  1080/3 = 360DPI.  If you set your image resolution
> (using Image->Scale Image and changing the X and Y resolution) to 300
> DPI, then your image will be 3.6" across.  How do I know this?
>
> 1. Create a new image (blank white background) at any size.
> 2. Image->Scale Image, then set the width to 1080 pixels.  Click on
> "Scale" to scale the image to that size.
> 3. Image->Scale Image, then set the resolution to 300 for the X and Y
> resolution.  Click on "Scale" to change the image resolution.
> 4. Image->Scale Image, then change the options menu next to the
> "Height"
> field from pixels to inches.  Now you can see how wide your image is
> going to be when it's 1080 pixels across.
>
> Clear as mud?  Try it a few times. It's not that hard to grasp
> once you
> see it in action.
> --
> Michael J. HammelPrincipal
> Software Engineer
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>   http://graphics-muse.org
> 
> --
> He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier.
> -- From a real employee performance evaluation.
>
> ___
> Gimp-user mailing list
> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
> 
> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>
>
> 
>
> ___
> Gimp-user mailing list
> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>   

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

Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43

[Ken Tanaka]

Steve Thompson wrote:
> About the whole naming issue.
>
>   

> I remember recently attending a local club for photography
> enthusiasts.  The question came up of what image editing software
> various people used.  Photoshop was a frequent answer, as one would
> anticipate, as were a number of other Windows based tools.  I made
> mention of the Gimp, and people looked at me rather peculiarly.  I
> went on to mention that it was a very powerful application and
> completely free, but beyond their bewilderment, not even a bit of
> interest was expressed.
>   
Maybe a 15 minute GIMP demo of something that is not easy to do in
Photoshop is in order. Most clubs are happy to have offers to show new
techniques.

>
> A cute name just doesn't spell for me the kind of future user
> penetration I would like for the Gimp to have.  Names do have value -
> do you think an image editor called 'Snuggles' would gain much
> traction with serious photo professionals?  I don't, because just like
> 'the Gimp', it conveys a tool that doesn't take itself seriously.
>   
I have no trouble taking 'GIMP' seriously--the website is good at
showing it is a major program, with documentation and tutorials. If you
can introduce it well enough that someone other than you mentions at a
photo club meeting that they had fun trying out the GIMP, the name is no
longer a barrier.  But are you sure the name is a barrier? it may be
that people like what they are used to and don't like learning curves,
no matter what they are called (it probably took quite a bit of time for
them to become comfortable with their first image editing program).

The odd name could help people remember it.

"'Smuckers,' with a name like that it's gotta be good"

-Ken

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

Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name

[Ken Tanaka]

Chris Mohler wrote:
> 1 - The majority of GIMP users do not find the acronym GIMP offensive.
>
I actually have no problems with the name "GIMP", nor do I care if the
authors choose to change the name, just as long as it doesn't happen often.
> 2 - US citizens do not have a world-wide "right" to make all the world
> inoffensive, nor do they constitute the majority of english-speakers
> on earth.
>
> 3 - Making sure everything is inoffensive to every person on the
> planet is futile.
>
I agree with your other two points also. I'd hate to have to start
referring to "bigots" as "Persons of Prejudice" or "zealots" as the
"Moderationally Challenged" ;-). The open source community usually has a
good sense of humor, and although I thought "GnuImage" was a
tongue-in-cheek sort of suggestion, I made the post anyway since it
could actually be a viable compromise if the name Really Needed to be
changed.

-Ken

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

Re: [Gimp-user] Please Change the Derogatory Name

[Ken Tanaka]

Raphaël Quinet wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 16:00:25 -0500, Eric P <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Personally, I think the name should change not because I find GIMP 
>> derogatory but because I think a name that somewhat
>> identified (even vaguely) what sphere the software is used it would be a 
>> boon.> 
>> Inkscape is an excellent name in my opinion.  It is somewhat ambiguous, but 
>> you definitely know that software named
>> Inkscape must have something to do with the artistic sphere.  That's all you 
>> really need.
>> 
>
> I agree.  Among the various arguments about changing GIMP's name, this
> is probably the only one that makes a bit of sense.  This is not a
> problem for those who know that "GIMP" actually stands for "GNU Image
> Manipulation Program" but those who do not know GIMP yet will probably
> not know the expansion of the acronym either.  Besides, the acronym is
> rarely expanded in casual talks and most users see only "GIMP" in the
> splash screen and in the window titles so they may not even know what
> this stands for.
>
> It may be interesting to associate the name of the application with
> what it does.  If we look at GIMP and its derivatives, we have:
>   GIMP- Meaningless unless it is expanded.
...

Maybe if we all make a concerted effort to call it by the shortened name
of "GNU Image", people with hear "NewImage" (sounds more glitzy, like a
"TM" should follow immediatly afterward), and the name could be
self-fulfilling.

>   Dogwaffle   - Bad.
...
Eww, sounds like somebody stepped in that one...;-)
>   PhotoPaint  - Good.
> For the vector drawing programs, names like InkScape, Skencil or
> Sketch are rather good.
>
> Several other applications in the same area seem to have more
> interesting names.  Maybe GIMP could become more popular if it
> switched to a name that is more directly associated with graphics.
> Maybe not.  As Yosh mentioned, GIMP already has some mindshare and a
> new name would not only have to be good, it would have to be good
> enough to justify sacrificing the popularity of the current name.
>
> So feel free to propose better names that are:
> - related to the graphics, photo or image manipulation domains
> - cool, inspiring
> - unique so that we don't run into trademark problems
> - short enough to fit in the applications menu or window titles
> - suitable for most languages and cultures
>
> If you find a name that meets all these criteria and would probably be
> immediately adopted by a marketing team if GIMP were a commercial
> product, then keep in mind that you would still have 90% chance to
> have the name rejected because some developers simply do not want to
> change the name.  With that in mind, I wish you good luck...
>
> -Raphaël
> ___
> Gimp-user mailing list
> Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
> https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
>   


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

Re: [Gimp-user] Aperture

[Ken Tanaka]

Kirk Thibault wrote:

> See:
>
> http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs.html
>
> Minimum System Requirements
>
...

>
> Obviously, very few Mac users possess machines with these specs. I
> will say, if someone can make using RAW as easy and powerful for post-
> processing as standard 8-bit processing, and makes the decision that a
> new generation of hardware is the most feasible, effective way, then
> hats off to them. 

I agree. The target audience is Professional photographers, they don't
even hint at Prosumers or use the phrase "serious hobbyist." Now that
the G5 Quad is out, I'm not sure if my CRT iMac (G3) is officially 2 or
3 generations out of date, but I'm pretty happy to use the Gimp for free.

-Ken

-- 
= Enterprise Data Services Division ===
| CIRES, National Geophysical Data Center / NOAA  |
| 303-497-6221|
= Ken.Tanaka*noaa.gov =

___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] archival-quality gilmp prints

[Ken Tanaka]

I use an Epson C-84 at home, so far the DuraBrite inks Epson uses for 
prints are holding up well (about a year old). Their previous generation 
of inks did fade with time, noticeably over 2 years. Look for acid-free 
on the paper too. If you are picky, you might archive the image files 
you like on CD-ROM and keep that with the pictures, hopefully that will 
outlast the paper and allow you to reprint to verify or replace paper 
photos at a later date.


-Ken

Helen wrote:


I'm using an HP Deskjet 5550, on good-quality photo paper.
My prints lose color in less than a year.
Is there a way to prolong the life of a print, other than an
extremely expensive giclee printer?
Thanks,
Helen
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
 



--
= Enterprise Data Services Division ===
| CIRES, National Geophysical Data Center / NOAA  |
| 303-497-6221|
= [EMAIL PROTECTED] =

___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

Re: [Gimp-user] Show mouse cursor arrow in screenshot acquire

[Ken Tanaka]

Thank you for the various input and suggestions. I'll use the "xfd -fn 
cursor" command to get some images that I can reuse as needed later as a 
cursor.

-Ken
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

[Gimp-user] Show mouse cursor arrow in screenshot acquire

[Ken Tanaka]

I'd like to have the mouse cursor arrow appear in the window of an 
acquired screenshot. This is for when I want to illustrate a pulldown 
menu item. When I use the Acquire screenshot functionality of the GIMP, 
the cursor doesn't appear. Is there a way to have the cursor show up? 
Perhaps a different screenshot program, but all the ones I've seen on my 
system also leave the cursor arrow out of the screenshot.

I'd rather not have to draw a cursor on the image later. Might not be so 
bad if there was a brush shape that looked like an arrow. Is it possible 
to add a cursor arrow brush? If so it's probably already been done, but 
I don't know where to get it.

I'm using GIMP 1.2.3
KDE 3.1.3-6.6 Red Hat
Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS release 3 (Taroon Update 4) 
(2.4.21-27.0.1.EL)

If this is in the documentation please let me know, I couldn't find it 
there or online in mail list archives or GIMP website.

-Ken
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user