[Gimp-user] resizing
I'm submitting a picture that needs to be 1.5 megapixels. How do I tell GIMP that this picture should be 1.5 M? The scaling feature doesn't offer me a chance to say that. Thanks you, -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] GIMP on Chromebooks?
I'm thinking to get a Chromebook and wondering if GIMP works well on a Chromebook. I've seen conflicting opinions (some say you can install GIMP but it's not the full version of GIMP). So I wonder if anyone has any knowledge or experience of whether GIMP installs and works well on Chromebook. Thanks, Helen, using GIMP on Suse Linux ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] paint with color from gradient
But there is nothing in the matrix that says says Color from Gradient. The closest thing I can find is Random color. In gimp 2.6 there is a tick-box for Color from Gradient and it makes a graceful predictable gradual flow from one color to another. Can we still do that, in 2.8? Thank you, On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Olivier oleca...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-11-17 0:11 GMT+01:00 Helen etter...@gmail.com: I used to know how to paint with color from gradient. Various help sites say hoose the dynamics Color From Gradient, but I haven't been able to find that option. How can I use airbrush with Color from Gradient? Thanks, When the airbrush tool is selected, look in its options in the bottom part of the window. Click the icon on the left of Dynamics to open the menu of available dynamics. -- Olivier Lecarme -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] paint with color from gradient
ok thanks I finally found that. Playing with the fade length helps, but it still doesn't behave like Color from Gradient in 2.6. What should be in the text box to the right of the icon? I sit here with gimp 2.8 on my desktop and 2.6 on my laptop, same two colors, and I can't get 2.8 to make a smooth gradual transition like 2.6 does. I'm trying different settings in the text box to the right of the icon. Fade tapering seems to get the closest. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Gary Aitken a...@dreamchaser.org wrote: On 11/17/14 07:49, Helen wrote: But there is nothing in the matrix that says says Color from Gradient. The closest thing I can find is Random color. In gimp 2.6 there is a tick-box for Color from Gradient and it makes a graceful predictable gradual flow from one color to another. Can we still do that, in 2.8? Hmmm, on my 2.8 version it's item #5 in the drop-down. In the matrix, it would be row 4 (color) and column 7 (fade). Are you seeing something different? On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 1:43 AM, Olivier oleca...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-11-17 0:11 GMT+01:00 Helen etter...@gmail.com: I used to know how to paint with color from gradient. Various help sites say hoose the dynamics Color From Gradient, but I haven't been able to find that option. How can I use airbrush with Color from Gradient? Thanks, When the airbrush tool is selected, look in its options in the bottom part of the window. Click the icon on the left of Dynamics to open the menu of available dynamics. -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] paint with color from gradient
I used to know how to paint with color from gradient. Various help sites say hoose the dynamics Color From Gradient, but I haven't been able to find that option. How can I use airbrush with Color from Gradient? Thanks, -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] brushes
How can I get the airbrush to fade out? I have tried the fade slider at different lengths, but no position there makes any difference. What else do I need to do? Gimp 2.8.2 Thanks, -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] brushes
Can Krita brushes be used in gimp? If yes, can someone give a direction as to how to access krita brushes while using gimp? -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp users matter
Why aren't you scaling it before you export it? That would be way too scary!! The easiest way (for me) to lose a lot of work on a .xcf file would be to scale it and then accidentally save. The old (2.6 method I described) protected me from an accident such as that. On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Mark Morin mdmp...@gmail.com wrote: Why aren't you scaling it before you export it? Undo the scale or don't save the scaled xcf? It seems to me that you would want to minimize any possible (even if trivial) distortion by editing the exported (flattened) image rather than what you are actually working on. On 1/13/2014 11:27 AM, Helen wrote: which buttons exactly did you press in GIMP so that you no longer saw it? In other words tell us exactly what you're doing, in both versions of gimp ok First In gimp 2.6: open or create new file. Name it. I now have (e.g.) village.xcf Work on it for weeks, saving every few minutes with file save I now have village.xcf with all layers preserved I finish the picture, and do two steps: file save, and then file SaveAs village.png I now have two copies of my creation, one with layers, and one flattened. The village.png is now the one I see on my screen; title bar confirms I then do Image scale image change X Y resolution to 72 and pixel to some small size and click Scale. I now have one large village.xcf with all properties preserved,and one small flattened village.png for mailing or uploading. All is well. ( For those who keep saying you were never able to do this, I posted a screen shot at http://helenofmarlowe.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/usinggimp/ showing that yes, in 2.6, you could see and work on the saved as image. click screenshot image to enlarge) Now, in gimp 2.8 open or create new file. Name it. I now have (e.g.) village.xcf Work on it for weeks, saving every few minutes with file save I now have village.xcf with all layers preserved I finish the picture, and do two steps: file save, and then file export I now have a flattened image named village.png So I need to scale it, make it small enough to email or upload But unlike in 2.6, I can’t simply proceed to do that. I have to re-open village.png ( Can't work on an image that's now showing on the monitor) So I go to File Open Recent and click village.png But of course when it opens it's no longer png It opens as [village](imported) Now I can of course scale this one down, but I can't save it as png so I have to export it again after I scale it. But then I have to rename it because I already have a village.png. Is this the intended work flow for creating a small, flattened png copy of a large multi-layerd xcf? It seems to be creating difficulties for a number of users. I don't think we'd have had this mountain of complaints over something as trivial as an unwanted save warning. On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote: On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 15:19 -0500, Helen wrote: Ok, I'm trying, but this just doesn't make sense to me. You're saying I was never able to see my file after I save as to png or jpg, in prior versions of GIMP. Helen, I think what's going on here is a question of people using words differently, or more or less precisely. None of us can see files unless we take apart the computer, get out a microsocope, and look at the surface of the disk. No, I'm not being a smart-ass :-), what I mean is this: The only way we see a file normally is if some program or other shows it to us. So when you say a file disappears, or you can't see a file, please tell us where exactly you were seeing it before - on the deskop? In a gimp window? On the list of programs at the bottom of your screen? Then, which buttons exactly did you press in GIMP so that you no longer saw it? E.g. don't say, I saved it, say, In gimp 2.8, (1) choose file-quit (2) when the prompt appears, if you quit you will lose 20 hours of work, press save (3) now gimp is no longer displaying my file and has gone away. In gimp 2.6, (1) choose file-save (2) select a filename happyboy.jpg and press OK (3) press OK to save the file (4) GIMP is still displaying the file and the title of the window says happyboy.hpg In other words tell us exactly what you're doing, in both versions of gimp, as if you were telling someone else sitting at your desk how to operate the computer. Then say what you expected to see, what you actually saw, and what exactly was the difference. If it's a bug we's like to understand and fix it. if it's a problem with the manual, or a place where GIMP is harder to use than it could be, we'd like to know that too. I love your drawings, by the way. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp users matter
which buttons exactly did you press in GIMP so that you no longer saw it? In other words tell us exactly what you're doing, in both versions of gimp ok First In gimp 2.6: open or create new file. Name it. I now have (e.g.) village.xcf Work on it for weeks, saving every few minutes with file save I now have village.xcf with all layers preserved I finish the picture, and do two steps: file save, and then file SaveAs village.png I now have two copies of my creation, one with layers, and one flattened. The village.png is now the one I see on my screen; title bar confirms I then do Image scale image change X Y resolution to 72 and pixel to some small size and click Scale. I now have one large village.xcf with all properties preserved,and one small flattened village.png for mailing or uploading. All is well. ( For those who keep saying you were never able to do this, I posted a screen shot at http://helenofmarlowe.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/usinggimp/ showing that yes, in 2.6, you could see and work on the saved as image. click screenshot image to enlarge) Now, in gimp 2.8 open or create new file. Name it. I now have (e.g.) village.xcf Work on it for weeks, saving every few minutes with file save I now have village.xcf with all layers preserved I finish the picture, and do two steps: file save, and then file export I now have a flattened image named village.png So I need to scale it, make it small enough to email or upload But unlike in 2.6, I can’t simply proceed to do that. I have to re-open village.png ( Can't work on an image that's now showing on the monitor) So I go to File Open Recent and click village.png But of course when it opens it's no longer png It opens as [village](imported) Now I can of course scale this one down, but I can't save it as png so I have to export it again after I scale it. But then I have to rename it because I already have a village.png. Is this the intended work flow for creating a small, flattened png copy of a large multi-layerd xcf? It seems to be creating difficulties for a number of users. I don't think we'd have had this mountain of complaints over something as trivial as an unwanted save warning. On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote: On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 15:19 -0500, Helen wrote: Ok, I'm trying, but this just doesn't make sense to me. You're saying I was never able to see my file after I save as to png or jpg, in prior versions of GIMP. Helen, I think what's going on here is a question of people using words differently, or more or less precisely. None of us can see files unless we take apart the computer, get out a microsocope, and look at the surface of the disk. No, I'm not being a smart-ass :-), what I mean is this: The only way we see a file normally is if some program or other shows it to us. So when you say a file disappears, or you can't see a file, please tell us where exactly you were seeing it before - on the deskop? In a gimp window? On the list of programs at the bottom of your screen? Then, which buttons exactly did you press in GIMP so that you no longer saw it? E.g. don't say, I saved it, say, In gimp 2.8, (1) choose file-quit (2) when the prompt appears, if you quit you will lose 20 hours of work, press save (3) now gimp is no longer displaying my file and has gone away. In gimp 2.6, (1) choose file-save (2) select a filename happyboy.jpg and press OK (3) press OK to save the file (4) GIMP is still displaying the file and the title of the window says happyboy.hpg In other words tell us exactly what you're doing, in both versions of gimp, as if you were telling someone else sitting at your desk how to operate the computer. Then say what you expected to see, what you actually saw, and what exactly was the difference. If it's a bug we's like to understand and fix it. if it's a problem with the manual, or a place where GIMP is harder to use than it could be, we'd like to know that too. I love your drawings, by the way. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp users matter
Close. Not exactly but closer than anyone has understood so far. Mark said: Helen opens myfile.jpg with gimp. She saves myfile.jpg and it becomes myfile.xcf. She can't see myfile.jpg any more to see what it looks like I suppose that's true in some (trivial?) sense but doens't matter. I see the .xcf. She exports myfile.xcf to myfile.jpg and that's fine, the jpg is saved but it is not displayed. If the xcf had been saved, she is looking at the xcf. If the xcf had not been saved and she exported myfile.jpg to a jpg file, she is now looking at untitled.xcf. This is what the problem is. Well, I would never export a file that hasn't been first saved a xcf, but regardless of that, I don't see what I was working on.Mark I can't do what you said about windows, I have no computers that run windows but I assume what you are thinking is what i can do in digkam, and yes the file is there. But to continue working on it I have to open it again. She can't see it because the file name is no longer in the title bar of the window. She is apparently looking in the title bar of the image window--that off color strip that displays the file name of the image in the window. No, not looking at the title bar of the image window. Thre isn't one. It's gone. Although, yes, the file is on my computer. I posted a screenshot here http://helenofmarlowe.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/usinggimp/ yesterday showing what I see in gimp 2.6 after exporting. I'll post a screenshot of what I get in 2.8 after exporting. And, Liam, I believe this is what you're asking. In 2.8, I save every few minutes with File Save. I see a brief less than a second progress bar but nothing changes. All is well. At some point later, the picture is (more or less, sort of) finished, and I want to send it somewhere. I go through four steps: File Save (just to be sure) and then File export. I confirm, a longer (10 seconds?) progress bar, and then the image is gone. No there. Yes, I can still open it with Digikam or Gimp's File Open Recent, or with Gimp's document history, and maybe I need to just accept that. My old ubuntu laptop with 2.6 is very old and not suitable for real work, and I think that my SuSE 12 probably would not support the 2.6 gtk On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Mark Morin mdmp...@gmail.com wrote: Can I offer my interpretation of this communication breakdown? Apologies to Liam for previously not replying to list. Helen opens myfile.jpg with gimp. She saves myfile.jpg and it becomes myfile.xcf. She can't see myfile.jpg any more to see what it looks like. She exports myfile.xcf to myfile.jpg and that's fine, the jpg is saved but it is not displayed. If the xcf had been saved, she is looking at the xcf. If the xcf had not been saved and she exported myfile.jpg to a jpg file, she is now looking at untitled.xcf. She can not see the jpg. I thought this was phrase was self evident but: myfile.jpg is no longer present in the title bar of the the window containing the image that used to be myfile.jpg. It is my understanding that she wants to see what myfile.jpg looks like. That is the file that she will be using in her work, not untitled.xcf and she wants to be sure it looks like she wants it to look. Liam's e-mail response was: Why not? Why can't she see it? Where is she looking? And why did it go away? She can't see it because the file name is no longer in the title bar of the window. She is apparently looking in the title bar of the image window--that off color strip that displays the file name of the image in the window. Why did it go away? As in, why did it change from 'myfile.jpg' to 'untitled.xcf?' That's the $10,000,000 dollar question. NB I have no problems with the current save/export features of gimp. I am not jumping into any flame wars but at the same time maybe someone could take the filters of that flame war off and take a second look at Helen's question. If I can understand it, I'm sure others can. Helen, open up an instance of windows explorer, put it in icon mode (extra large) and browse to where you saved your file--there's your jpg. If all you want to do is see it, click on it and it will open in your default image viewer. If you want to edit it, keep working on the file that is open in gimp (there's no need to open the exported file and it's probably better not to because exported files do not contain all of gimp's layers and effects). On 1/10/2014 4:26 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 15:19 -0500, Helen wrote: Ok, I'm trying, but this just doesn't make sense to me. You're saying I was never able to see my file after I save as to png or jpg, in prior versions of GIMP. Helen, I think what's going on here is a question of people using words differently, or more or less precisely. None of us can see files unless we take apart the computer, get out a microsocope, and look at the surface of the disk. No, I'm not being a smart-ass :-), what I
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp users matter
Ok, I'm trying, but this just doesn't make sense to me. You're saying I was never able to see my file after I save as to png or jpg, in prior versions of GIMP. I don't think anyone here is deliberately giving out bad information, but I just don't understand this. I still have GIMP 2.6 on a very old Think-Pad laptop running ubuntu. I can not only see the file after I save as but I can also edit it. Here is a screenshot. I opened gimp create new made one blend stroke, then Saved As jpg. I do see the file. Then I went to Edit -- and took a screenshot showing that I am able to edit that file. Not just see, but see it and edit it. I can't do this in gimp 2.8 because that ability has been removed. Click on the screenshot to enlarge it. http://helenofmarlowe.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/usinggimp/ You can see that it has been saved as a jpg and is still available. So, I'm sorry and I apologize for being tiresome, but I just don'tunderstand what you are saying. On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Joao S. O. Bueno gwid...@mpc.com.brwrote: On 10 January 2014 00:43, Helen etter...@gmail.com wrote: yes, thank you for that, but I donw't want to to import it as a new gimp image. I want to still be able to see my jpg file. This really is not about the (slight in my view) inconvenience of another keystroke. It's about not being able, regardless of how many keystrokes, to see my file after it's exported. I think I will have to give up because I can't seem to find the right words to make anyone understand. Let's try to rephrase again: You never before in GIMP could see your jpg file after it was written to disk, unless you performed a file-revert right after you saved to JPG in versions prior to GIMP 2.8; The data you kept seeing on GIMP, with the attached name of the jpg file was the data as it was in GIMP memory, prior to writing the file - just as it happens in GIMP 2.8. Therefore, you are just complaining that you could fool yourself before - and current GIMP does not allow you to be tricked into thinking the image you are seeing is exactly what is on the jpg file anymore. js -- On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Joao S. O. Bueno gwid...@mpc.com.br wrote: In time: In one of your previous messages, you say you loose a lot of time having to re-open the exported images to check them - Maybe you haven't noticed that exported images are listed in the recent files just as saved ones, and that the ctrl + 1 keyboard shortcut will import, as a new gimp image, any just exported message in seconds? (And this way you will actually see the image as represented in that file, on disk). So, maybe this will fix your perceived workflow from previous versions. js -- -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] gimp users matter
This feature imposes no hardship on any user and occasionally prevents lost work. This is so obviously wrong that I wonder whether different gimp users are experiencing the same behavior. If this were a matter of receiving an unnecessary warning, then I would agree that the passion is misplaced. This is not about whether or not one wants to see a warning. Several gimp users (including me) have said that the problem is that the file disappears. It is gone. It is no longer on the screen. I don't know how to say this more clearly. I am not a casual gimp user. I use the advanced features. The disappearance of the file is what is causing the problem, not the (useful or unuseful) warning. -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Looking back at 2013
However, this did not solve the problem for those of us who simply want to continue save as to .ping, .jpg, or .whatever we choose. That feature was arbitrarily removed for no good reason. My wish for 2014 is that this feature will be returned. On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Maurice wrote: On Tuesday 24 Dec 2013 16:54:21 Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: Michael Natterer reduced the save/export friction by adding a simple way to jump from Save to Export dialog when users attempt to save images in JPEG, PNG, etc. That's good to hear - thank you (and Michael). In which versions of GIMP does it now appear, please, and where can a description of how to use it available? Please just use GIMP 2.8.10 :) Alexandre ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
Although I also hate the new feature which restricts what I can do, I don't think taking a poll is a useful idea. It seems to me the developers ought to be aware, as everyone else is, that this was a bad move, that many (who knows whether most, but certainly many) GIMP users hate it, and just allow users the same choice we had for so many years. If there is a down side to allowing users to make this choice, I haven't heard what that is. On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 5:07 PM, vitalif for...@gimpusers.com wrote: Or you could just remap the keyboard shortcuts. I don't just want to remap the shortcuts. Because (1) sometimes I use the shortcut and sometimes I use the menu item (and sometimes it's Save as, not just Save) and (2) I can't save to XCF using the remapped Export. And I don't like pythonish save/export extensions, either, because I don't want a separate command for normal save. What constructive actions can be applied? I think these are: 1) Just make a configuration setting for enabling/disabling the format restriction for Save. 2) I think that even disabling the restriction on a permanent basis without adding any settings also won't harm anyone. Those who like Export will be able to still use Export, and those who dislike Export will be happy with normal Save. 3) Make an online poll on some well-known site (so a sufficient amount of users could vote) to understand real proportion between those who like and those who dislike the save/export feature. Something like What option is better? with the choices like: Only one Save command, Save + Export, without restricting the Save formats, Totally separated Save and Export (with Save being XCF-only), and Don't care. -- vitalif (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?
Also, when you export the image to a JPEG, if suddenly your open image window disappears, well that is not supposed to happen at all and sounds something like a GIMP program crash, but we don't have enough information as is to determine that. And when GIMP crashes, you at least get a message telling you in no ambiguous terms that something crashed. No, GIMP is not crashing. The pix.xcf is still on the screen. Old way: Create file 300x300, work on it. Save as orchard.xcf, all layers intact, everything fine. Scaled image to 72x72, named it Orchard-scaled.png (or .jpg if that's what they ask for). I then had that Orchard-scaled.png on my screen and I could make changes if I wanted to before mailing it. It seems I can't do that any more. Now, if I want to see my 72x72 Orchard-scaled.png, I have to open it, and as soon as I open it, it becomes a file that I can't mail because it's no longer a .png. So my Q, is there a way to open that .png, keep it a .png, tweak it if I want to, save the .png and mail it? -- Stratadrake strata_ran...@hotmail.com Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?
When you make an edit on the image and you export it, the JPEG doesn't disappear and the edited image still shows in the image window. It's that you want to see the _exported_ JPEG file to confirm the export resulted in the JPEG file you wanted to create for the client I think you're thinking you have to re-open the exported JPEG file in GIMP to make more edits is causing some confusion. Not exactly, no, the edited image that is now on my screen, the xcf, is probably a resolution of 300 x 300 and may be a print size of 12 x 16; But the exported image is a resolution of 72 and is not meant for printing. *That* is the one that I have to re-open (because I can't force it not to close when I export.) *That's* the one I have to mail, and if I decided to make a tweak, I can't just save and mail -- I have to export, re-open ... I don't see any way around the repeated reopenings except to make sure everything I do is perfect the first time, and that's even less likely than the developers reconsidering this. Thank you Tom. gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] A Sad case of regression
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Helen wrote: Here are the facts: every time you save your image as JPEG, you lose information. It is by design a lossy image format Exactly! We should not have to keep opening these files! They should stay on my screen until I finish with them. But noone's forcing you to close them. Are you kidding? When I export, it closes! If you know some way that I can keep my .png or .tif or .jpg open after saving it (aka exporting) in that format, please tell us how. It is the new GIMP that is forcing it to close! Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?
Andrew Bridget A remark such as if you don't like it, don't use it is rude and unhelpful, and such remarks should never appear on this list. I've stayed out of the discussion of this regression -- I hate the change to-- but I appeal for courtesy to those who care enough to try to communicate the problems this is causing. And it is causing so many problems for me that I'm wondering if it's going to be a game breaker. I work with agents for my art galleries. One of my agents wants everything sent as jpeg so I send her what she wants. One wants .tif so I send her what she wants. Juried exhibits ask for jpeg (I don't know why) but this change adds hours to a job that should take me half an hour. Helen On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Andrew Bridget andrew_brid...@btinternet.com wrote: Just because a program does not perform the way you would like it to, doesn't make it an inferior program. GIMP is a very powerful Image Editing program that thousands of people use day to day. For every one that states in this forum that it is a regression there is probably as many that like the new behavior that don't post. As it has been said before if you don't like it, use something else, no body makes you use GIMP. On 14/06/2013 17:03, Crew wrote: In case you are not just phishing (which is unlikely, as there are several such emails posted recently:-) Given the way Adobe are moving to a subscription model, there are going to be a lot of new users like myself seriously looking at The Gimp in future. The recent addition of colour management finally moved The Gimp into the realms of being worthy of serious consideration, but trying to make it some sort of exclusive package that works with it's own file formats is just daft. If you can drag and drop an image into the program it should by default save back to the same format. Everything other program works that way, changing that protocol is unintuitive and just daft. If the discussion has had thousands of comments in the past it's pretty clear it's at least contentious. Do the developers of The Gimp want it to be taken seriously ?, or will they be happy just making something non-standard that will make them look foolish. As a potential new user that's how it's looking to me. You're wrong! The problem is NOT a lack of conventional Save command, rather a lack of conventional Import command! The program opens non-native files! That should not happen! It should import them so you are fully aware that you need to export to a non-native format. Helping new users of KompoZer and The GIMP Sorry, I was mistaking The Gimp for a sensible image editing program. If this is the sort of advice given out to new users I can see why The Gimp is regarded so poorly by imaging professionals. Paul Holman www.colourprofiles.com __**_ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-**listhttps://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list __**_ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-**listhttps://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Helen etter...@gmail.com wrote: Ron said: Since Linux is all in favour of freedom of choice, how about offering the user an export / save choice in the Preferences dialogues ? I wish to endorse this. The export feature could have been added without disabling the save as feature. And I, also, have tried to go back to gimp 2.6, but now that I have upgraded to suse 12.3, gimp 2.6 will not work with the latest suse gtk Helen On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Renaud OLGIATI ren...@olgiati-in-paraguay.org wrote: On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:28:31 +0200 Uniklaps uni.kl...@t-online.de wrote: When you open a jpg-file in GIMP 2.8 and make changes and save this again as jpg, you cannot re-change the changes you made (if file is closed). If changes are not necessary, GIMP can save as tif or jpg. (But are you always sure, that your work is perfect?) Saving the jpg you worked with as an GIMP xcf-file you can open it again and continue your work or go back to changes you made. With an jpg this is not possible. But: You should be familiar to the GIMP - feature layers Let us put it this way: If I thought I might want to undo/modify changes later, I would Save As (or Save As Copy) in .xcf; but when I load a .jpg, work on it, and Save, I know that I wont be able to undo changes, and I expect the saved file to replace the original one, not to have the original left untouched and something completely different saved. Andrew Bridget andrew_brid...@btinternet.com wrote: Just because a program does not perform the way you would like it to, doesn't make it an inferior program. No, but it makes it more difficult, and less appealing, to use. As it has been said before if you don't like it, use something else, no body makes you use GIMP. I like GIMP, have liked it for fourteen years; I just dont like GIMP 2.8, Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote: - If not, what is the latest release of GIMP that behaved in the old (and intuitive) way, so I can go back to that version ? 2.6.11 I will be now be looking for the 2.6.11 package since you kindly tols me it is free from that export/save sillyness. radar.ma...@free.fr wrote: but if Gimp is made easier and safer for most of people, let's trust our contributors. Since Linux is all in favour of freedom of choice, how about offering the user an export / save choice in the Preferences dialogues ? Cheers, Ron. -- Il est dangereux d'avoir raison dans des choses où des hommes accrédités ont tort. -- Voltaire -- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org -- ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] A Sad case of regression.
So you're saying that thinking of The Gimp as an image editing program is wrong then, it need to be primarily regarded as a project based compositing program ? That is what we've been saying for the past 7 years. GIMP= Gnu Image Manipulation Program. Right? -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] drop shadow
Steve, that's wonderful -- hand roll my own shadows! Seems so simple and obvious after it's explained that I wonder why I ever thought I needed a plug-in for this. So cool! Thanks, Steve On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: On 06/03/2013 10:32 PM, Helen wrote: I have an image with two rectangular photos, in separate layers. I want each photo to have a drop shadow. No matter what I do, I keep getting the drop shadow applied to the entire image, not to the layers. I've tried creating the drop shadow while on the individual layers, while on the background, I've tried it with layers selected -- regardless of what I do, the drop shadow keeps applying to the entire image. I used to know how to do this! Help? Suse 12.3, gimp 2.8 Hey Helen, You might want to try doing Layers Autocrop Layer against the layers with photos in them, before using a drop shadow plugin on them. That might do the trick. Or make the shadows yourself - this would be my approach: 1. Create a new transparent layer, move it below the two layers with photos in them. 2. Select one of the layers with a photo in your Layers dock, right click the layer thumbnail and do Alpha to selection 3. Select the new transparent layer, drag and drop to the main canvas to fill the selection with black. 4. Select the other layer with a photo, right click and do Alpha to selection again. 5. Select the new transparent layer, drag and drop to fill the 2nd selection with black. 6. Do Select None (or control + alt + a) to clear the selection. Your transparent layer now has two black rectangles, hidden under the photos in the layers above. Use the tool at Filters Blur Gaussian Blur to soften the edges of the shadow rectangles, then turn on the Move tool in your main toolbox and use the arrow keys on your keyboard to tweak the location of the shadows. Adjust the shadow layer's transparency if required. :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] drop shadow
I have an image with two rectangular photos, in separate layers. I want each photo to have a drop shadow. No matter what I do, I keep getting the drop shadow applied to the entire image, not to the layers. I've tried creating the drop shadow while on the individual layers, while on the background, I've tried it with layers selected -- regardless of what I do, the drop shadow keeps applying to the entire image. I used to know how to do this! Help? Suse 12.3, gimp 2.8 Thanks much -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] gimp 2.8 brushes
I recently upgraded to suse 12.3 and now have gimp 2.8. (I like 2.6 much better, but that's not the question.) I lost my personal brushes, but I have the old brushes on another machine. Is there any reason I should not move my old (2.6) brushes into gimp 2.8? My fear is that the 2.6 brushes may not work with 2.8, but may override them so that nothing works. -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse12.3 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] gimp colors
I've been trying for days to print a small 4x6 picture that I drew in gimp. I've even spent quite a bit of $ putting new print cartridges in my printer, even though they were not empty. Just trying to cover everything I can think of. The picture just comes out pink. There should be no pink in this picture. I have lots of trashed pages printed with Gimp, one with LibreOffice tex, one with LibreOffice Draw. There are also thin vertical white lines on the print. It looks fine if Print Preview. All settings on both file and printer are set to Best. RGB color. Using Linux, Suse 12, gimp 2.6.11, printer Epson Stylus 1400. Thanks for any ideas. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] gimp colors
Thanks Rolf, I'm not sure whether you overlooked that I'd already done that, or whether what you're suggesting is somehow different from what I did. On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Rolf Steinort i...@meetthegimp.org wrote: Hi Helen, On 07.05.2013 16:59, Helen wrote: I've been trying for days to print a small 4x6 picture that I drew in gimp. I've even spent quite a bit of $ putting new print cartridges in my printer, even though they were not empty. Just trying to cover everything I can think of. The picture just comes out pink. There should be no pink in this picture. I have lots of trashed pages printed with Gimp, one with LibreOffice tex, one with LibreOffice Draw. There are also thin vertical white lines on the print. It looks fine if Print Preview. All settings on both file and printer are set to Best. RGB color. There are a lot of possibilities - it can be GIMP, Linux, your printer or other stuff. I would try this: - export the image as a JPEG, in the original size and good quality. - import that image into a Libre Office text document with the size of your paper as the document size - print that from Libre Office. If this comes out OK, GIMP is the culprit, if not, then it's Linux or your printer. These white stripes can be caused by a not properly aligned print head. I hope this helps! Rolf http://meetthegimp.org __**_ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-**listhttps://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] GIMP print
Printing a picture in landscape mode, with GIMP. Picture has lakes, sky, trees, rooftops, mountains, etc. In Gimp, some of the dark trees, and the dark areas of shrubbery around a path, have big open white blotches. After doing everything I know to do in GIMP, I opened OOo, inserted the pictures into a frame, and printed the picture. The big white spots are missing, and the picture actually looks pretty good. This tells me (I think) that the problem is not the printer (Epson Styus 1400) or the picture (I flattened it, thinking maybe something about the layers might cause that problem.) In Gimp 2.6, Suse 12, I'm setting Image Quality high, Color Precision best, Print Quality high. Oh, and these are not random white spots. Each print (wasting lots of ink and paper here) has the big white spots in the same places -- the same trees, the same shrubbery, same shapes to the white blotches. Any ideas? -- Helen Etters ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP print
Patrick, ok I've done that now. It is here http://www.flickr.com/photos/ettervor/8618757171/in/photostream All the dark trees/shrubs have big white blotches on the print. Of course, the problem is only on the print, not on the digital file. But as I said, when I print it via odt (OO0 text document) it prints ok. (But I want gallery quality, so can't just say, well, ok then, use OO.) On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Patrick Shanahan ptilopt...@gmail.comwrote: * Helen etter...@gmail.com [04-04-13 11:47]: Printing a picture in landscape mode, with GIMP. Picture has lakes, sky, trees, rooftops, mountains, etc. In Gimp, some of the dark trees, and the dark areas of shrubbery around a path, have big open white blotches. After doing everything I know to do in GIMP, I opened OOo, inserted the pictures into a frame, and printed the picture. The big white spots are missing, and the picture actually looks pretty good. This tells me (I think) that the problem is not the printer (Epson Styus 1400) or the picture (I flattened it, thinking maybe something about the layers might cause that problem.) In Gimp 2.6, Suse 12, I'm setting Image Quality high, Color Precision best, Print Quality high. Oh, and these are not random white spots. Each print (wasting lots of ink and paper here) has the big white spots in the same places -- the same trees, the same shrubbery, same shapes to the white blotches. Any ideas? Not w/o seeing the image, but please do not post it to the list. Provide a place for viewing the image. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.orgPhoto Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member Registered Linux User #207535@ http://linuxcounter.net ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] gradient tool
I appreciate the responses, which led me to experimenting. I don't seem to have the Gradient Editor. I guess it's time to upgrade from gimp 2.6. But even if I did have the Editor, I can see that it's beyond my level. Thanks all -- I'll keep playing with it. Helen On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Richard Gitschlag strata_ran...@hotmail.com wrote: On the one hand, using the Gradient Editor you can assign individual nodes to reference the foreground or background color instead of using a fixed color (right click a node handle and select the Color Type), however something like the Tube Red is actually a bit more complicated than a FG/BG fade (it uses more than two colors) so no, you can't just change its color to something else - you'd have to apply a consistent change the hue across like five nodes. It's certainly doable, it just isn't as simple as it looks. :( -- Stratadrake strata_ran...@hotmail.com Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. -- Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 18:05:33 -0400 From: etter...@gmail.com To: rc...@pcug.org.au CC: gimp-user-list@gnome.org Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] gradient tool Thanks, yes, I've found that one, and it works to fill an entire selection. But I like the 3-d effects of, for example, the Tube Red. The sharp crisp color and the sense of depth, but not the red. I guess there's no way to turn it green and blue w/o loosing the sense of depth that it gives. I can go to color balance, or to various ways to color it after I've used it, but all those ways cancel out the depth effect. So I guess I'd have to be able to choose the colors before using the gradient. On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Owen rc...@pcug.org.au wrote: Rectangular SelectionBlend tool Gradient then pick oh, maybe Burning Transparency for example, or Tube Red -- Is there any way to choose the colors for those gradients? To make them FG BG Colors for example? In the Blend Tool options, you can set the gradient to FG to BG -- Owen -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] gradient tool
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Richard Gitschlag strata_ran...@hotmail.com wrote: But the Gradient Editor has been around pretty much forever, its window is just not loaded into the toolboxes by default. Try double-clicking a gradient from the Gradients dialog (on its icon/preview, not its name), this should bring up the Gradient Editor. Nope. Doesn't. I had already tried that actually, and also tried the four methods described on the web page (which I happily bookmarked ). I don't seem to have that edit feature. I did find that the Land and Sea gradient, in conical shape, does something close to what I'm trying to do. Helen GIMP 2.6 on Suse Linux -- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 21:00:17 -0400 Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] gradient tool From: etter...@gmail.com To: strata_ran...@hotmail.com CC: gimp-user-list@gnome.org I appreciate the responses, which led me to experimenting. I don't seem to have the Gradient Editor. I guess it's time to upgrade from gimp 2.6. But even if I did have the Editor, I can see that it's beyond my level. Thanks all -- I'll keep playing with it. Helen -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] gradient tool
Rectangular SelectionBlend tool Gradient then pick oh, maybe Burning Transparency for example, or Tube Red -- Is there any way to choose the colors for those gradients? To make them FG BG Colors for example? Thanks, Helen Using GIMP 2.6.11 on linux, Suse 12 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] gradient tool
Thanks, yes, I've found that one, and it works to fill an entire selection. But I like the 3-d effects of, for example, the Tube Red. The sharp crisp color and the sense of depth, but not the red. I guess there's no way to turn it green and blue w/o loosing the sense of depth that it gives. I can go to color balance, or to various ways to color it after I've used it, but all those ways cancel out the depth effect. So I guess I'd have to be able to choose the colors before using the gradient. On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Owen rc...@pcug.org.au wrote: Rectangular SelectionBlend tool Gradient then pick oh, maybe Burning Transparency for example, or Tube Red -- Is there any way to choose the colors for those gradients? To make them FG BG Colors for example? In the Blend Tool options, you can set the gradient to FG to BG -- Owen -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Creating Transparent Text
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. Several 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 because 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 background. Does my question make sense? How is that done? (The brush I made successfully 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 gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Creating Transparent Text
I guess I need more detail. I've done this, and I'm attaching the result. In case attachments aren't allowed, or you can't see it, I'll tell you that there is messy white space all the way around the sig. The steps I took were to open the scanned sig, copy, paste as brush, and then used it to sign a pix. White mess all around. Thanks for any help - I think I just need more detail. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: On 02/19/2013 11:56 AM, Gunold Brunbauer wrote: Color - Color to Transparency a.k.a. Colors Color to Alpha :o) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 sig13.xcf Description: Binary data ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Creating Transparent Text
Sorry!!! I can't see to do this in one mailing! I did do the color - color to alpha before I did the copy/paste as brush. Thanks for your patience. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Helen etter...@gmail.com wrote: I guess I need more detail. I've done this, and I'm attaching the result. In case attachments aren't allowed, or you can't see it, I'll tell you that there is messy white space all the way around the sig. The steps I took were to open the scanned sig, copy, paste as brush, and then used it to sign a pix. White mess all around. Thanks for any help - I think I just need more detail. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.netwrote: On 02/19/2013 11:56 AM, Gunold Brunbauer wrote: Color - Color to Transparency a.k.a. Colors Color to Alpha :o) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Creating Transparent Text
Thank you! I'm going through it now. Open Source users are such a generous lot! Thanks On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Tobias Lunte tobias.lu...@hfg-gmuend.dewrote: I've created a quick screencap. Hopefully, this will clear any misunderstandings. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXKPKMiUko8 bw, Tobias Lunte//Tobl Am 19.02.2013 18:22, schrieb Helen: I guess I need more detail. I've done this, and I'm attaching the result. In case attachments aren't allowed, or you can't see it, I'll tell you that there is messy white space all the way around the sig. The steps I took were to open the scanned sig, copy, paste as brush, and then used it to sign a pix. White mess all around. Thanks for any help - I think I just need more detail. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.netwrote: On 02/19/2013 11:56 AM, Gunold Brunbauer wrote: Color - Color to Transparency a.k.a. Colors Color to Alpha :o) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing listgimp-user-list@gnome.orghttps://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Creating Transparent Text
Wow! I've never done a vector path, but what you did is so clear and clean that I only wish I had not cropped off my last name before sending the file! Is vector path a gimp tool? I'll look it up. Something new to learn. Thank you! Helen On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: On 02/19/2013 01:37 PM, Burnie West wrote: It looks to me like the original signature scan had the artifacts around it. Same here - and very low resolution. The signature itself is only 64 x 142 pixels, and the artifacts look like they could have come from scaling an earlier copy in an indexed format. If possible I would start over with a new signature and scan, at 300 DPI or above, with black ink on white paper. Then, applying the filter Colors Color to Alpha would produce a much more acceptable result. The more uniform the color and texture of the paper (or etc.) used, the more certain the result. Or you could go in a whole other direction, make a vector path from the available signature, stroke it with an oblong brush with its angle and hardness tweaked, and use the result. This would be a typical part of creating a logo from a signature. Just for an exercise, I did that: http://pilobilus.net/xfer/helen.zip Picture worth way more than a thousand words. :o) Steve ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list -- Helen Etters using Linux, suse11.4 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
