Re: [Gimp-user] can we change bit processing header in subject line?
carol irvin wrote: bit processing is now such a huge email that I am having trouble telling when I want to read it and when I don't. There is some really good creative info coming in on it which I don't want to miss. But there is also some sort of continuing feud going on under that same heading, which I do not want to read. Perhaps the people who want to post continuing creative insights could title theirs on the subject line creativity and if they want to limit it even further could add camera or painting or art. As for the feuders, I don't really know what they can label theirs but I would really like something that earmarks it so I can delete it unread as I don't want to devote further time to scanning through them just to delete them. I suppose you could just label it feud continues and those who want to follow it can and those who want to delete unread can do so. Thank you. I strongly agree: while the feud may be interesting to the participants, for someone standing outside (me) it reads like an endless recycling of the same arguments in different words. Put it down to my ignorance. I'd join Carol in appreciating it if the feuders and the creators could use different titles for their posts. Thanks Doug ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Creativity Ceilings
In response to an excellent suggestion from Carol I have reposted this item under the above title. Should anyone wish to continue this discussion then please do so here rather than under the Bit-depth Processing title as it gets a bit confusing when discussions drift off topic. Thanks Carol ORIGINAL Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Bit-depth Processing Date: Wednesday 03 October 2007 From: gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu On Tuesday 02 October 2007 23:11:19 Leon Brooks GIMP wrote: On Wednesday 03 October 2007 04:35:36 David Southwell wrote: IMHO photoshop is NOT a tool designed for the average user. Average can mean typical it can mean numbers (as in mean/mode/median), either way, PS fits the bill. You are right - I should have defined my use of the term more precisely to guard against misinterpretation. In this context I used average when I should have referred to those who are not professional image makers producing high quality/high resolution images for whom a whole range of tools, including photoshop become necessary. There area much larger number of people whose primary use of a camera is for taking snaps on holiday and do not have the time, energy or inclination to devote to image processing or becoming familiar with complex applications such as photoshop and gimps. So perhaps my perception of average user is different to yours. So if you want to struggle with an average creativity ceiling suffer average problems, you would choose CS. I do not see either PS or Gimp creating ceilings on creativity. My experience of creative people is that they find ways to be creative no matter what tool set they happen to be using at the time. This is rather like the painter who will sometimes use an extremely limited pallette to achieve a desired affect. Just because s/he has all the colours/media available it does not mean one needs to use them on every occasion. IMaybe I should also have distinquished between issues related to creativity and issues that are related to having techniques available to meet the demands set by the creative goal. For example the technical requirements for projecting an image at 1024x768 resolution or for producing a monster 3x2 metre high resolution print may make equal demands in the creativity department but the technical demands of the media are fantastically different. The choice of image capture and processing techniques are IMHO far more closely related to what I will call the exhibiting media. A lot of people (can't offer you numbers on this one, have to settle for many) regard average as the only reasonable alternative to failure. They won't necessarily _say_ this when discussing it, but that's how it operates in Real Life. I hear your sentiment -- some people do have that type of psychological framework but I am not certain whether one can generalize from it because people approach choices in so many different ways. The essence of this approach is that it makes them allergic to true success to attributes like innovation. When marketing to these users (or their bosses) I suspect you'd have to figure out what they're hedging against in specifying PS, then show how GIMP clearly offers them better results _in_their_terms_. For some Gimp will meet some or all of their requirements. IMHO it is not about better results but about appropriate tools for certain tasks. If for example the task requires raw and non-destructive editing (for whatever reason ranging from artistic to client requirement) then one chooses an appropriate toolset - Critera also frequently limit the range of available methods. This is doubly hard because opening discussion on the very topic which subtly terrifies them simply raises internal horror shuts down communication. So you have to be subtle about it, probably approach it under the guise of the fabulous new gadget I found which seems to solve X, Y Z rather than this PS replacement that we're going to bet the boat on. If they are terrified then perhaps their terror would have been sufficient to have destroyed their creativity!! Creative people use many different types of tools and brushes and are rarely horrified by having more choices. They are also most unlikely to bet on any individual choice! As I see it gimp is a valuable tool within my 8 most frequently used digital image manipulation programs. I also have numerous tools I use much less frequently. IAs a creative artist I do not want to limit my output by seeking replacements but widen my potential by adding to my tool sets. I try to ask myself what is the best tool for me to achieve this particular result? I often find myself using more than one tool set on the same piece of work. I suppose my choices come from an approach that prioritizes devotion to the creative output rather than to a specific tool or method. Others will choose different priorities.
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 13:02:02 Simon Budig wrote: Not just noise, his points have some merit. But they are directed to the wrong audience and the intended audience already knows about his points. That ironically makes his mails pointless... If you regard my contributions as noise then please do not waste you time reading them unless you are trolling to start a flame war. If so you will not be successful here because I will follow a policy I have followed over 30 years on mail lists -- keep on topic and, apart from making a polite qrequest to keep on topic, ignore trolling provocations designed to take threads off topic by making personal comments. So here is my polite request: You are not obliged to read my posts so please be thoughtful of others and either contribute on topic or keep quiet. I would add: Maybe you are not comfortable with the topic but please leave anyone else who has a different point of view, free to contribute in comfort. Topics in which noone is interested die early. Most people realize that one person's noise may be another's music. I find the most interesting and valuable contributions come from people who have sound arguments well expressed and who, when they disagree with another's argument, are able to find ways to respond and be personally respectful at the same time. Thanks ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 11:52:13 Patrick Shanahan wrote: * gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] [10-02-07 13:47]: Much unnecessary quote removed. One thing I forgot to mention is that if you are simply trying to edit an image for your own use and can revisit the original then the absense of non-destrucitve editing features may not be a handicap. The point is to know what you can and cannot do with each and every toolset and when a tool is appropriate to your needs and when it is not. You keep getting back to this non-destructive editing. WHO can edit an image for what-ever purpose and not retain the original? HOW can you edit anything and not have a copy of anything to begin with? Your question is a good one and the distinctions are sometimes simple, sometimes complex. In this response I am going to try and explain my perception here. First the distinction between the original and the process of editing. You are correct to point out that sensible processors will retain a copy of their original. Here your question suggests a lack of clarity on my part. 1. The term non-destructive editing is term that describes a process chosen for editing rather than the simple retainment of a copy of the original (which is simply a back up). 2. There is no external authority who precisely defines what is and what is not non-destructive editing but it is a term in wide use and has a certain group of expectations attached to it that sometimes loosely and sometimes quite precisely define it. 3. The term Non-destructive editing is generally taken to have a meaning that goes well beyond the simple keeping of a record of exactly what has been done at every stage so one can troll back through the record to recreate each stage. 4. The non-destructive specific record from editing is not the same as a separate record of every action or stage in the process. 5. Now I will attempt to amplify. Let us say we are beginning work on a basic image. (a) I am not entirely happy with the exposure of the image as a whole. If I was editing destructively I would use a tool to change the exposure and the original image chnages accordingly. If I am editing non-destructively then I need a tool to help me. For example it could creates an entirely different layer that appears in a layer stack above the original image. This layer would hold instructs that would apply my adjustment to a selection of layers that appear below the adjustment layer. However this is only stage one and does not quite yet meet current expectations of non-destructivenness. We have to be able to two further requirements: the ability to revisit the adjustment layer and tweak it at any later time (no matter how many subsequent changes have been made). The ability to turn on and off the effect. This is most important because it enables one to view the image with and without the effect at any subsequent time and also create other layers providing the same effect but applying different values. (b) I now carry out many more edits each one of which is similarly handled. Furthermore when I close that image it can be reopened and all the adjustment layers are there for subsequent tweaking by \anyone to whom I choose to pass the file. IF I can present a third party with a full copy of my work, and they can go back in and tweak each effect to their satifaction than I can honestly tell them the image has been editied non-destructively. However if they had to retrace my steps from the history then the edit would definitely not be regarded as non-destructive. How is the record different? Usually with non-destructive editing you have the history (which is the same as a record of every step). However more importantly the adjustment layers only record for each effect what actually modifies the original to produce the final image. So the noise in the history from work that I did, but discarded, does not clutter up the non-destructive editing record. For example if I had adjusted the exposure up and down repeatedly the final adjustment layer would only hold my final setings rather then the ones I had discarded. However if I had two layers holding exposure adjustments I could have both affect the final record or either or none! It is important to appreciate that for the professional interested in high quality images the image at the base of the stack will normally be the raw image stored at 16 bit per channel. However when one is working using HD the actual image could be 48 bit per channel as a result of combining three images to produce the base. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
Von: gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you regard my contributions as noise then please do not waste you time reading them unless you are trolling to start a flame war. If so you will not be successful here because I will follow a policy I have followed over 30 years on mail lists -- keep on topic and, apart from making a polite qrequest to keep on topic, ignore trolling provocations designed to take threads off topic by making personal comments. Then what do you do if the topic you keep on to can be regarded as a trolling provocation? I'm not sure if many do still follow this thread. If you want to get back on track, you should probably provide a short summary, for example: - who is your intended target audience - what are you trying to tell them - what do you expect from them Also, it would be interesting to know if you are aware of the future plans for GIMP. HTH, Michael -- Ist Ihr Browser Vista-kompatibel? Jetzt die neuesten Browser-Versionen downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/browser ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] What's the opinion here of Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional?
What's the opinion here of Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional, by Akkana Peck, Apress, 2006? It's supposed to cover GIMP 2.4. http://www.bestbookdeal.com/book/detail/1590595874 Dick Moores ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
On Thursday 04 October 2007 03:41:05 Michael Schumacher wrote: Von: gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you regard my contributions as noise then please do not waste you time reading them unless you are trolling to start a flame war. If so you will not be successful here because I will follow a policy I have followed over 30 years on mail lists -- keep on topic and, apart from making a polite qrequest to keep on topic, ignore trolling provocations designed to take threads off topic by making personal comments. Then what do you do if the topic you keep on to can be regarded as a trolling provocation? I'm not sure if many do still follow this thread. If you want to get back on track, you should probably provide a short summary, for example: - who is your intended target audience - what are you trying to tell them - what do you expect from them Also, it would be interesting to know if you are aware of the future plans for GIMP. In response to your questions: 1. As far as your trolling remark I cannot see what is in the heads of others and I would strongly recomend the policy I adopt. It has kept me out of flame wars for over thirty years. There are always people on the net with strange agendas who get offended for no rational reason. I remember a classic case on a mailing list (using email on on a uucp system) in 1978 when someone used the words this project has been aborted and there was a whole string of responses objecting to the language - it went on for weeks and nobody seemed to think of anything else. People who are easily offended respond irrationally and suspect others of underhand motives. They usuially are unable to take what people say at face value. So I tend to feel a little sorry for them rather than take personal offense. I am not responsible for how others respond and I try and respond to irrationality by ignoring the dross and concentrating on on-topic elements. If you really think I am trolling then you are fee to ignore my contributions safe in the knowledge I will not treat anyone else with unwarranted suspicions or encourage flame wars!!. As far as your other questions: 1. The audience is those that I respond to or respond to me and either discuss or answer on topic. 2. What is in my contributions.. 3. Only what they want to offer. What I like to see is openess, integrity, humanity and respect for others (preferably including myself). I interpret your questioning as an indication you suspect I have some kind of agenda that goes beyond what I say. lf you are harbouring such suspicions then they are misplaced. My response to the interpretation is to wonder what your responses tell me about you. All I can say is I am at a stage in life (around 70) when I have seen much come and go and have benefited artistically from the contributions of many. I like to give back a bit and know that creativity does not come without a struggle. As far as the future plans of Gimp I read the technical detail but find it hard to put my finger on a sense of mission that enables me to place its future in context. However my focus here is on what I and other users can do now with the tools that are available. Artistically I need to solve my challenges with the tools I have and understand what they can and cannot do for me. So for me, being firmly, as far as Gimp is concerned, on the user side, I am not therefore too concerned about plans but am glad to hear that 16bit is on the agenda along with non-destructive editing. When it comes along I will be the first to try it and assess both its potentials and its limitations. When I paint I do not use a fine camel hair brush to put on large swathes of thick paint and the brush manufacturer would not feel the least offended if I told a student hey you might want to use a palette knife here. The brush manufacturer would know that if I saw a student trying to do something with a palette knife that would be better done with a camel hair brush I would be equally honest in the reverse direction. Watching this list (which I have done for many years) I wonder if the Core tem developing Gimp are a little too emotionally committed to the toolset and are not able to see that good tools are pushed to their very limit by users and that during his/her development good artists need to know where the limits are. Developers, by definition , are primarily interested in what is coming -- after all that is only to be expected because they are creating it!! On the other hand users are focused not on the plans for Gimp but on what they can and cannot do with Gimp NOW!! FWIW I wonder whether Gimp developers all too easily misinterpret user discussion of current limits as a critique of Gimp. Some even react as though developers themselves are under attack. Having both technical and artistic background I see such discussion as an artistic necessity, an appreciation of the toolset and an
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 02:55:35 -0700, gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 02 October 2007 13:02:02 Simon Budig wrote: Not just noise, his points have some merit. But they are directed to the wrong audience and the intended audience already knows about his points. That ironically makes his mails pointless... If you regard my contributions as noise then please do not waste you time reading them unless you are trolling to start a flame war. If so you will not be successful here because I will follow a policy I have followed over 30 years on mail lists -- keep on topic and, apart from making a polite qrequest to keep on topic, ignore trolling provocations designed to take threads off topic by making personal comments. I assume that you have read the part of Simon's message that you have quoted above. He did not write that your contributions are noise. He wrote that they are addressed to the wrong audience. Furthermore, the developers (who may be a better audience for feature requests) are already aware of the benefits of non-destructive editing, and the GEGL library is a step in that direction. Considering that most developers are already aware of the benefits (and overhead) of non-destructive editing, I am wondering why you keep on arguing about it. You are posting this on the user list. Although this list can provide good feedback about what some users like or do not like, this may not be the best place to argue about how to implement a feature that has already been discussed several times. Well, unless you think that some members of this list who are not already developers would be so convinced by your arguments that they would decide to learn programming, study the GIMP internals, and start redesigning the whole GIMP core on their own. But I consider this to be rather unlikely. So please think twice before arguing about these issues. I suggest that you take a look at GEGL if you haven't looked at it already. Then feel free to bring back this topic on this list or on the developers list in about two years if you think that GIMP is not making progress in the right direction. -Raphaël P.S.: The suggestion to bring this back in two years is not a way to keep you away. It is just a reflection on the speed at which GIMP is developed and probably the earliest date at which some of the suggested features could be reviewed. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] This layer would hold instructs that would apply my adjustment [...] Yes! In fact, when I first started to work with layers I'd expected the layers to work like this (i.e. store change instructions instead of pixels). Being an old Unix hacker, I'd go for a way to have Gimp dump the changes in some structured way to an external (text) file, one that can be editied and re-applied. -- Johan ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] What's the opinion here of Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional?
On 10/4/07, Dick Moores [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the opinion here of Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional, by Akkana Peck, Apress, 2006? It's supposed to cover GIMP 2.4. http://www.bestbookdeal.com/book/detail/1590595874 I'm a novice, having used the Gimp to process photos for the last two years but without learning image processing in a structured way. I recently bought the book (it was recommended in a video podcast at www.meetthegimp.org) and did the first four chapters ... and think it looks good; i already learned a lot, and it only seems to be getting better. It looks good for not-so-advanced users, IMHO. best regards Carsten PD: I must get used to live withour Reply-To-munging - sorry for the omission -- http://www.modspil.dk - fordi tiden kræver et MODSPIL! ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
On Thursday 04 October 2007 04:42:55 Raphaël Quinet wrote: On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 02:55:35 -0700, gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 02 October 2007 13:02:02 Simon Budig wrote: Not just noise, his points have some merit. But they are directed to the wrong audience and the intended audience already knows about his points. That ironically makes his mails pointless... If you regard my contributions as noise then please do not waste you time reading them unless you are trolling to start a flame war. If so you will not be successful here because I will follow a policy I have followed over 30 years on mail lists -- keep on topic and, apart from making a polite qrequest to keep on topic, ignore trolling provocations designed to take threads off topic by making personal comments. I assume that you have read the part of Simon's message that you have quoted above. He did not write that your contributions are noise. He wrote that they are addressed to the wrong audience. Furthermore, the developers (who may be a better audience for feature requests) are already aware of the benefits of non-destructive editing, and the GEGL library is a step in that direction. Considering that most developers are already aware of the benefits (and overhead) of non-destructive editing, I am wondering why you keep on arguing about it. You are posting this on the user list. Although this list can provide good feedback about what some users like or do not like, this may not be the best place to argue about how to implement a feature that has already been discussed several times. Well, unless you think that some members of this list who are not already developers would be so convinced by your arguments that they would decide to learn programming, study the GIMP internals, and start redesigning the whole GIMP core on their own. But I consider this to be rather unlikely. So please think twice before arguing about these issues. I suggest that you take a look at GEGL if you haven't looked at it already. Then feel free to bring back this topic on this list or on the developers list in about two years if you think that GIMP is not making progress in the right direction. -Raphaël P.S.: The suggestion to bring this back in two years is not a way to keep you away. It is just a reflection on the speed at which GIMP is developed and probably the earliest date at which some of the suggested features could be reviewed. ___ I think you miss the point and I do not agree that it is the wrong audience-- because the question arose from users. Users hear about non-destructive editing but do not understand it. Artists use tools to achieve results. When discussing tools, as users do on a user list, the most important discussions to them are discussions of the potentials and the limits of the tool set. To be able to do that they need an understanding of the concepts otherwise they do not realize they can use Gimp when they might otherwise think they are forced to use PS. I hear you coming from a developer perspective and feel you are in danger of misinterpreting discussion of non-destructive editing as a critique of developers, development strategy etc. Discussion of tool potential and limitation is what users of graphic tool sets expect to discuss!! If they cannot discuss these things then they cannot discuss things that are important to them. This is a perspective I do not expect developers to understand but they should not treat such discussion as anathema either. Users who are enthusiatic about tools will push the tools to their limits. I aim to help them do that. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] photo resolution
Hello, If I am producing images for the web, is 72 dpi still sufficient across all possible monitors--a little lap top screen to a large screen HDTV? ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] photo resolution
On Thursday 04 October 2007 07:03:14 David Heino wrote: Hello, If I am producing images for the web, is 72 dpi still sufficient across all possible monitors--a little lap top screen to a large screen HDTV? Think in pixels. If you need to cater for full screen digital projection 1024x768 pixels is pretty standard. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] GIMP learning sites
http://en.flossmanuals.net/bin/view/Gimp/OptimisingImagesForWeb?topic=WebHome http://gimp.org/tutorials/ http://meetthegimp.org/?cat=8 http://www.gimpguru.org/ http://gimp-savvy.com/BOOK/ http://gug.sunsite.dk/ -- carol ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] bit processing and deconstruct editing--AUTO delete
Since I read that many of us are in agreement about not wanting to continue reading about the ongoing feud, I just wanted to let everyone know that I will not be reading any more emails which have the above two headings. Those seem to be the two that the feuders are using. Thus, if a comment is expected from me on any query, you will have to put something else in the subject line as all of those will be deleted unread henceforth. If they start up on another subject line with the ongoing feud, those will be deleted unread as well. I try to answer all queries but you will have to gain my attention on the subject line as a non-feuder in order for me to see your comment. Thanks to those of you already changing to new subject lines. My inbox appreciates it! -- carol ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] remember last location for save as, save a copy, save, open
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:20:33 +0200, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If an image already has a filename associated to it, then open the Save file-chooser in that folder. Otherwise use the folder of the most recent save operation. Would that make sense? Definitely. That should be the default behavior. If needed, the current behavior (always use the last directory) can be emulated with a temporary bookmark. The opposite is not true: if you are working on several images and want to save each of them in the directory they came from, then the current file-chooser behavior gets in the way. -Raphaël ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] plug-in vs. script
hi gimpusers! please, what is the difference between a plug-in and a script? I am asking because I never know if I should copy a plug-in (e.g. from the registry.gimp.org - site) in to the plug-in or the script folder. I'ts always a try and error thing. And most of the times it's working when I am copying the plug-in into the scripts folder. but what is then a plug-in? thanks for explanations, tina -- newhouse - new media Bettina Karena Lechner neue str 16, 2565 neuhaus austria mobil: +43 660 46 25 0 25 tel.: +43 26 74 878 72 fax: +43 2674 878 81 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.newhouse.at --- Der Anfang ist die Hälfte des Ganzen. Aristoteles (384 - 322 v. Chr) ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] What's the opinion here of Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional?
Dick Moores [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the opinion here of Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional, by Akkana Peck, Apress, 2006? I think that Peck's book is by far the best available book about the subject. It has some slight defects (what book does not have?), but its coverage is excellent and its way to describe matters very good. It is onnly a pity that the printer could not manage a better color rendering. It's supposed to cover GIMP 2.4. It covers version 2.4 fairly well. No important feature is missing. -- Olivier Lecarme ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dodge burn tutorial?
Gracia M. Littauer wrote: I found on for PS (which should be useful), but wondered if gimp has one Yes on my install, it's the last icon, looks like a small black ball with an extension on it. Keystroke shortcut is: Shift+D -- Until later, Geoffrey Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] dodge burn tutorial?
I found on for PS (which should be useful), but wondered if gimp has one -- Gracia...Cooleemee, NC Registered Linux user #263390 -ZENWALK 4.4 http://www.flickr.com/photos/mynameistaken/ When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross- Sinclair Lewis ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Bit-depth Processing
--- carol irvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know it is terribly easy for me to end up with mud after I overdo it with all the plug-ins, styles, custom shapes and so forth that I've amassed in the PS program. Like your national park pics? :) Actually, I like the surrealistic look it gives them. Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=listsid=396545433 ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] remember last location for save as, save a copy, save, open
El dt 02 de 10 del 2007 a les 18:20 +0200, en/na Sven Neumann va escriure: Hi, On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 23:31 +0200, Pere Pujal i Carabantes wrote: I see the Recently Used (files) entry in file-chooser. Can it hold Recently Used Dirs ? For the Save dialog, this would probably make more sense than presenting recently used files. Would probably make sense to bring this up for discussion on the gtk-developer list or at least file a bug report for it against the GTK+ file-chooser. Done, see: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2007-October/msg00010.html If an image already has a filename associated to it, then open the Save file-chooser in that folder. Otherwise use the folder of the most recent save operation. Would that make sense? I have to disagree, that can be very confusing. (and very powerfull BTW, you can change the default saving directory on the fly): open a/b/c.xcf (named file) new unnamed.xcf new unnamed1.xcf save unnamed.xcf to d/e/f.xcf (file-chooser comes up) default saving directory comes d/e save a/b/c.xcf ( CTRL+S file-chooser doe not appear as the file has yet a name) default saving directory comes a/b nearly without notice save unnamed1.xcf What happens? a/b is presented when I just manualy selected d/e in the previous opened file-chooser. What about this?: If an image already has a filename associated to it, then open the Save file-chooser in that folder. Otherwise use the folder of the most recent save operation that implies the use of file-chooser. Yours Pere ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] floating selection--how it arose
--- carol irvin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The way I cropped was to use the horizontal selection marquee tool and then pressed ImageCrop in the menu of the image. When the crop was completed, I had my nice cropped image BUT I also had a floating layer and thus 2 layers in the layers palette. The only tool which would appear on the image thereafter was the move tool. Until I found the anchoring command, I was dead in the water. You don't need the Selection tool. Go right to the Crop tool and you'll be all set. Got a little couch potato? Check out fun summer activities for kids. http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mailp=summer+activities+for+kidscs=bz ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dodge burn tutorial?
On Thursday 04 October 2007 13:51:41 Geoffrey wrote: Yes on my install, it's the last icon, looks like a small black ball with an extension on it. Keystroke shortcut is: Shift+D Thanks..I know gimp has it, BUT I'm looking for a tutorial. -- Gracia...Cooleemee, NC Registered Linux user #263390 -ZENWALK 4.4 http://www.flickr.com/photos/mynameistaken/ When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross- Sinclair Lewis ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] non-destructive editing
--- Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think though that we need more people pointing out the obvious flaws in GIMP. Obvious to whom? Do you speak for the list members? We are all very well aware of them... We are? ...and you are just stealing our precious time. Again, do you speak for the rest of us? Now, granted, I'm fairly new here so I don't know what role you play in the GIMP world, but so far the only person I've seen bitching about noise is you. I find these discussions informative, and as a GIMP user, useful. As long as people don't start getting into how the source code does this or that, I don't have a problem the current line of discussions. Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Image resizing based upon image content
Kevin Cozens wrote: Dotan Cohen wrote: There is an amazing video describing an image resizing algorithm that removes (or adds) pixels based upon their importance to the subjecto of the photo. Can this be implemented in The Gimp? Of course it can be implemented in GIMP. It just takes someone with the time and ability to write the code for a plug-in that implements the algorithm. Looks like someone has implemented it already: http://registry.gimp.org/plugin?id=5479 http://zinx.xmms.org/colorize/ Trying to compile the supporting libraries.. it's a PITA, unfortunately. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dodge burn tutorial?
On Thursday 04 October 2007 13:51:41 Geoffrey wrote: Yes on my install, it's the last icon, looks like a small black ball with an extension on it. Keystroke shortcut is: Shift+D Thanks..I know gimp has it, BUT I'm looking for a tutorial. Why not ask meetthegimp, he does some great tutorials. Norman ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] dodge burn tutorial?
Am Donnerstag, den 04.10.2007, 21:03 +0100 schrieb norman: On Thursday 04 October 2007 13:51:41 Geoffrey wrote: Yes on my install, it's the last icon, looks like a small black ball with an extension on it. Keystroke shortcut is: Shift+D Thanks..I know gimp has it, BUT I'm looking for a tutorial. Why not ask meetthegimp, he does some great tutorials. Norman I did a bit on dodge and burning - not with the tool (I hate it!) but with a layer in overlay mode: http://meetthegimp.org/?p=47 It' video - so nothing to read up. And the imgage was made by Normans son. ;-) Rolf ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Fwd: national park pictures (art psychiatry)
On Friday 05 October 2007 04:21:32 carol irvin wrote: I've always suspected that this is because art is my escape from reality. Ah, well, at least you know what that is... that an Open Free escape is much safer more useful than one of those complex psycho-whatsisnames. (-: Cheers; Leon ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] photo resolution
On Friday 05 October 2007 00:03:14 David Heino wrote: is 72 dpi still sufficient across all possible monitors--a little lap top screen to a large screen HDTV? There ain't no simple answer to that. A simple laptop screen starts at about 1024x768 pixels (dots) so a 72DPI picture to cover that entirely would be about 14 inches by 11 inches. You don't want to cover that much in a web page, because there will be some actual page surrounding the image, plus web browser window frames etc. My wife's 19-inch CRT is set to about 2000x1500 pixels, so the answer for that is about double. Anyone using even larger monitors will be more than accustomed to stuff not fitting. One possible/partial answer is to use some JavaScript to read the window's dimensions alter the width height parameters of the IMG tag to scale whatever you provide, so it fits. To get really fancy, provide several different images have your JS select the closest fit scale that. Cheers; Leon ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP learning sites
On Friday 05 October 2007 00:22:59 carol irvin wrote: http://en.flossmanuals.net/bin/view/Gimp/OptimisingImagesForWeb? topic=WebHome http://gimp.org/tutorials/ http://meetthegimp.org/?cat=8 http://www.gimpguru.org/ http://gimp-savvy.com/BOOK/ http://gug.sunsite.dk/ All mookbarked now, thank you! (-: Cheers; Leon ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] photo resolution
David Heino wrote: If I am producing images for the web, is 72 dpi still sufficient across all possible monitors--a little lap top screen to a large screen HDTV? DPI has nothing to do with screen resolution. On screen, most images are displayed pixel-for-pixel (unless the application is told to resize the image). Unless you specify the resize in HTML, most (if not all) browsers will display your image pixel-for-pixel. This is why talking about DPI when saving for the web is meaningless. DPI *is* relevant when an image is scanned or printed. It is also sometimes relevant for fonts rendered by your computer. If you tell your system your DPI in regards to font size, it will change the font size to make it easier to view -- but there are 2 problems with that: the fonts might look fuzzy (reasonably easy to fix) and many programs will not display their content correctly because their programmers did not realize that the user might scale their fonts. As far as saving for the web, as others mentioned you should think in pixels. Things to keep in mind: * users with large screens might resize their browser windows to be much smaller * users on dialup (there are still a lot of them) really hate large images * some users might even turn off images while browsing (so please make good use of alt property) Hope this helps ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Image resizing based upon image content
On Thursday 04 October 2007, Konstantin Svist wrote: Kevin Cozens wrote: Dotan Cohen wrote: There is an amazing video describing an image resizing algorithm that removes (or adds) pixels based upon their importance to the subjecto of the photo. Can this be implemented in The Gimp? http://liquidrescale.wikidot.com/ and the video for it is here http://liquidrescale.wikidot.com/en:examples Only problem now: It's located in the layers menu, which should be changed to filters-something signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] photo resolution
From: David Heino [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I am producing images for the web, is 72 dpi still sufficient across all possible monitors--a little lap top screen to a large screen HDTV? Read here: http://scantips.com/no72dpi.html More information about resolution, DPI etc. from the main site: http://scantips.com/ -- Bob Long ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] captcha
--- mike reqavey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: please point me in the direction of how I could make a captcha around 8.5 x 11.0 inches. \ ---' / Sorry. Couldn't resist. :) Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. http://sims.yahoo.com/ ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] plug-in vs. script
A plugin is an executable - ie. it's a program you can run, like you can run Inkscape or GIMP. A script is a set of text instructions which are run by a script interpreter (script-fu). Thus, it's easy to tell the difference: * If it has a .scm extension, it's a script * Failing that, if you can open it in a text editor and it looks somewhat readable, it's a script. On 10/5/07, Bettina Lechner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi gimpusers! please, what is the difference between a plug-in and a script? I am asking because I never know if I should copy a plug-in (e.g. from the registry.gimp.org - site) in to the plug-in or the script folder. I'ts always a try and error thing. And most of the times it's working when I am copying the plug-in into the scripts folder. but what is then a plug-in? thanks for explanations, tina -- newhouse - new media Bettina Karena Lechner neue str 16, 2565 neuhaus austria mobil: +43 660 46 25 0 25 tel.: +43 26 74 878 72 fax: +43 2674 878 81 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.newhouse.at --- Der Anfang ist die Hälfte des Ganzen. Aristoteles (384 - 322 v. Chr) ___ 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] photo resolution
Hi Leon, Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 06:57:39 +1000 From: Leon Brooks GIMP [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] photo resolution To: gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu .. One possible/partial answer is to use some JavaScript to read the window's dimensions alter the width height parameters of the IMG tag to scale whatever you provide, so it fits. Though I am not sure but may be you can find a CSS attribute or something for this task instead of employing JavaScript. -- Best regards, Asif ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] FW: Question on copy from selection
Apologies if people get this duplicated but I didn't receive my own message and thought it may have been lost. -- Hi there, I have a question on copying a portion of an image in gimp. First, a little context. I needed to create a layer with only some features in an image. For that, I first selected a suitable area in the image using the Free Select tool. I then copied its contents (Edit - Copy) and pasted it (Edit - Paste) in a new layer (Layer - New Layer). This creates a new layer with only the desired features, as can be verified making the new layer the only visible layer. Now, if I go to the Channel Dialog, I can see the RGB and alpha channels looking right, with only the selected features there. However, if I make a copy of one of the RGB channels (right-click on the R channel, for example, and duplicate it), there is more than just those features, as can be verified by making it the only visible channel. My question then is if this is a correct behavior and if so, how can I make a copy of a selection with only the contents of that selection? Thank you, Hermano ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] remember last location for save as, save a copy, save, open
Hi, On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 17:12 +0200, Raphaël Quinet wrote: On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:20:33 +0200, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If an image already has a filename associated to it, then open the Save file-chooser in that folder. Otherwise use the folder of the most recent save operation. Would that make sense? Definitely. That should be the default behavior. If needed, the current behavior (always use the last directory) can be emulated with a temporary bookmark. The opposite is not true: if you are working on several images and want to save each of them in the directory they came from, then the current file-chooser behavior gets in the way. Huh? In GIMP 2.4 the Save As file-chooser opens in the directory where you loaded the image from. Your last sentence seems to imply that this is the behavior that you desire and I don't see why you describe it as 'gets in the way'. Sven ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
