Re: [Gimp-user] miror image
On Dec 17, 2006, at 8:12 PM, Alexis Everson wrote: Can anyone tell me please if there is an opton to mirror an image rather than just flipping it. I want to put a graphic on the other side of a banner and flipping it makes the letters backwards. A mirror image would make them the right way around after flipping. I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but a flip and a mirror are exactly the same. To demonstrate, write something on a piece of paper, stand in front of a mirror and look at the piece of paper while you hold it up. This is the mirror, obviously. Now flip the piece of paper and hold it up against the light. Same thing. Regards, Marco___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] miror image
On Dec 17, 2006, at 8:36 PM, norman wrote: Sorry, but I must disagree. If I look into a mirror my right side is still on the right. If I could flip, then my right side would be on the left. Uh, no. Think of that person in the mirror as someone else for a bit and forget the mirror is even there. If you were raising your right hand, then that person would be raising his left hand. Maybe it'd be even clearer if you stood across from someone and both raised your right hands. You'd find the other person's hand would be on your left side. Mirrors flip left and right. Always have, always will. Any text held up to a mirror would come out the same was as were it flipped. Take a flipped image, hold it up to a mirror and you can see what the image was like before the flipping. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Is this compatible?
On Oct 8, 2006, at 5:21 PM, Jozef Legeny wrote: PNG supports indexed and grayscale color modes which aren't lossless, however by default the PNG is entirely lossless That is a bit of a weird definition of lossless. If you save an RGB32 image as an indexed or grayscale PNG then yes, you've lost information. But that is inherent to grayscale and indexed images. You should have saved that as an RGB32 image, which PNG fully supports. In this case it isn't PNG throwing data away (like JPEG does), but the image editor (GIMP) converting to indexed/grayscale and then saving that. Indexed and grayscale modes in PNG are just as lossless as its non-indexed modes. However like I said there are methods of tuning the PNG's compression to be lossy, and yet still be PNG-compatible. No image editors that I know of implement these methods, however. (http://membled.com/work/ apps/lossy_png/). ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Is this compatible?
On Oct 7, 2006, at 7:25 PM, Chris Mohler wrote: Apologies - forgot to reply-all My advice would be to save your files in TIFF format. If you enable LZW compression, the file size will be significantly reduced without losing quality (unlike JPEG, and to some degree PNG). PNG is just as lossless as TIFF with LZW compression. There are ways of lossily compressing PNGs but they are non-standard and GIMP does not implement them as far as I know. Either will suffice in this case as photoshop reads both, though its support for PNG in certain situations (mostly having to do with 16 bits per channel images) is sub-par. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] How to draw a line? :(
Did you read the actual straight line tutorial? It's here: http://www.gimp.org/tutorials/Straight_Line/ It details exactly what to do, step-by-step. Marco On May 12, 2006, at 9:02 PM, Simon Roberts wrote: I'm feeling particularly useless today, I'm pretty much a total beginner with GIMP, but I can't believe this is as hard as I seem to be making it. I want to draw a straight line. I'm using Gimp 2.2.4 I try the paintbrush, I have a color selected, and I can draw a squiggly line. The help says that holding shift down will make all these tools constrained to straight lines, but mine doensn't draw anything. It looks like it's trying to do measuement or something. I try the path tool (which I can't claim to understand) and then try to stroke the path. I get polygons while I'm messing about, I can also get curves, but I don't seem to be able to get an actual line that stays on the page. What I _want_ is a straight line, constrained to horizontal or vertical, drawn with the caligraphic brush (so it has a chiselled end) and using the fade out option, so it disappears smoothly over a distance. Anyone want to tell me what's so obvious that I've missed it? Thanks in advance, Simon __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ 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] transparity
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 03:51:49AM +0100, Gert Cuykens wrote: hi i want to make the background transparent, when i add the alpha thingie and save the picture as png IE show some kind of blue stuff as background ? Internet Explorer doesn't support PNG Alpha channels by itself. There are hacks to make it work, though. Google for IE PNG Alpha Hack. It does support 1-bit (GIF-like) transparency, though. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] renaming the gimp
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 09:39:32AM +1100, Owen Cook wrote: On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gezim Hoxha wrote: P.S: I know GIMP is an acronym, but [almost] no one calls it GNU Image Manipulation Program either. Corrupt the acronym ..the Great Image Manipulation Program and if you didn't do an install-strip, you might want to call it the Bloody Large Image Manipulation Progam or BLIMP for short Or for the Chinese market: The Government Image Censoring Application, or the GICA. --- No, The GIMP does not need a namechange. I don't think filmgimp, now cinepaint, got any more popular when it changed names. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Making an image with a white background transparent?
On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 12:57:59PM -0700, dreadnought wrote: The tutorial mentions painting underneath the image to replace the white that should be part of the graphic, but doesn't go into how to do this? You can either select the region you don't want included, invert it, and then apply colour to alpha (thus excluding the white parts of the graphic), or you can create a new layer under the layer with your graphic and paint white into that. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] make white the transparent color
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 03:51:26PM +0200, Joachim Schiele wrote: is there a posibility to change the wite color tone, or any other specified by me to the alpha-color? i got a picture with a white background, now change the white to transparent. thanks in advice ;-) joachim Yes, the Color to Alpha plug-in. Comes with GIMP. You can find it at image/Filter/Colors/Color to Alpha. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Virus alert
On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 01:26:59PM -0600, Norma Carlson wrote: I just received a virus infected email from the Gimp-user list. My ISP mail protection program caught it and quarantined it so no damage was done. Just wanted to give all a heads up. No, this was a virus that set the gimp list as its sender address. I have no scanners whatsoever, and got no such e-mail. There is no need to notify this list (or any other list, in fact) of viruses. In fact, most of us probably don't even use Windows. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] printing
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 04:47:35PM -0200, Josenildo Marques wrote: When I try to print with The Gimp I have to choose my printer as the output. If I leave the output as PostScript Level 2, all it prints is unreadable gibberish on many sheets of paper. How can I solve this ? Your printer can't handle PostScript. You'll need to select your printer model or a compatible one from the list. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] printing
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 08:16:47PM -0200, Josenildo Marques wrote: Thanks, again, Marco. It's an Epson Styllus Colour 580. I am wondering if there is a way to save this setting so that I won't need to do that every time I want to print something. I'm fairly sure it can. I can't tell you how though -- I don't need to print from GIMP, and if I would, I have a postscript-capable printer ;) Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] targa image
On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 08:31:51AM -0200, Josenildo Marques wrote: Hi. I have created some trees with Arbaro Povray, but I cannot open them in The Gimp. It says the files are corrupted. Here is one example: $ file arbaro/pov/ca_black_oak.png arbaro/pov/ca_black_oak.png: Targa image data - RGB 400 x 600 Try renaming them to file.tga or selecting TGA from the 'determine filetype' dropdown menu in the file selector. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] png
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:43:43PM -0500, Bob Lockie wrote: KSnapshot: 34 108 bytes, 585x385, 24bbp, RGB, deflate. Gimp: 78 896 bytes, 400x263, 24bbp, RGB, deflate, compression 9. There are no options in KSnapshot so I don't know what the compression level is (can it be higher than the highest in Gimp=9?). I think 9 is the highest possible in zlib. Anyway, if no one has said it yet, this is most probably caused by you scaling the image with resampling turned on. This makes images less easy to compress when using the types of compression that PNG and such use. How about you put the images online somewhere so we can be sure of this? Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] png
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 06:13:47PM -0500, Bob Lockie wrote: The pics are on the web at: http://www.lockie.ca/test/ksnapshot.png http://www.lockie.ca/test/gimp.png Ugh, KDE is ugly.. *ducks* Anyway, this is exactly what I said. When you rescaled the image you made it harder to compress because of the resampling. Therefore the filesize is higher. Someone more of an expert in compression methods can tell you more about this, I don't dare get into it too deeply. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Where's Wilber gone ?
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:38:36PM +0100, Jina wrote: The small icon shown near the URL in my browser when visiting www.gimp.org is no more showing the smily face of Wilber, but a sort of... something ! what's that ? RELEASE WILBER !!! It's still wilber here... Maybe you have a caching problem of some sorts? Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] What happened to transparency after flatten?
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 11:06:09AM -0500, Kevin Myers wrote: Hi Marco - I've been working with some facets of digital images for a long time, but I still don't completely understand everything about transparency. In particular, you mention one of the things here that I am confused about. Could you please explain further exactly what transparency and alpha channels have to do with each other? First off -- unless you mean you want to see through parts of an image entirely, you mean translucency. Transparent - invisible; translucent - see-through. The alpha channel is basically a channel just like red, green, and blue, except that it determines the translucency of the pixel, instead of the colour. what does that have to do with alpha? I have no clue why they called it an alpha channel, if that's what you mean. Also, how is level of transparency actually applied in order compute the final display values for a pixel when a semi-transparent pixel is overlaid onto an underlying non-transparent pixel? While typing this email, I see sven has answered this. Although the original question in this thread involved png files, I am more interested in tiff files, but I suspect that essentially the same answer applies to both. Thanks! Both support alpha channels, yes. Marco ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Re: [Gimp-developer] makes it sense to add native CMYK support toGIMP?
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003, Helvetix Victorinox wrote: This may be entirely my deficiency, but I am unclear on the general usefulness of having a native CMYK implementation. On one hand I understand that there is a perceived value of working with the four values, on the other hand I think we expose too much of the underlying guts of the colour implemetation and gamuts to the poor user already. [snip] A contribution here would be the development of a good colour abstraction interface. Let the user choose things like if the image is a COLOR image or a Black and White image (GRAY), with or without transparency. None of this business of values like 255 (white in 8bit rgb). Naturally there will be people who want access to the underlying knobs and switches, and that's okay. But we ought to at least put a cover over it. I think CMYK ought to be a Save As option (as appropriate). Helvetix I disagree. I hate it when software shields away the more advanced features. It is adjusting to the user, while the user should be adjusting to software instead. More than that, it's not adjusting to the correct user. Marco Wessel ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] [Q] Resizing a PNG makes it BIGGER!
My guess is that this is because of the interpolation when resampling. Makes it less easily compressable. (Notice the 'anti-aliased' edges in the resized picture?) Marco Wessel On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Daniel Carrera wrote: Hi, This is really weird. I have a PNG image. I tried to make it smaller by resizing it down, but instead it got BIGGER. I don't understand this at all. I put the images on the web: Original: http://www.math.umd.edu/~dcarrera/screenshot.png Resized: http://www.math.umd.edu/~dcarrera/screenshot_resized.png With width and height of the resized image are 0.8 times the size of the original, so I would have imagined that the resized image would be 0.8*0.8 = 0.64 times the size of the original, but that's not the case: $ du -sk * 52 screenshot.png 128 screenshot_resized.png The new image is over 4 times bigger than the original! These are RGB images BTW, but that shouldn't cause this. Does anyone know what's happening? ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Install on Solaris 8
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 You need to recompile The GIMP with the libpng before it can open pngs. Marco On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Jim Clark wrote: Downloaded successfully, compiled successfully, and working fine. Except cannot open a png. Search, found the pnglib for Solaris. Downloaded and added the png library, went in properly to /usr/local/lib. But GIMP still cannot open a png. Can anyone offer a why not? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8UEnnwv7F35N3gLoRAiudAJkBLwyPCWAIBi78VPyaRfp0tiZNZQCeL8PQ qtlQb/LxVRhA7ebc84GUtp8= =1tVC -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gimp-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
