Re: [Gimp-user] Question about the new sliders
On 12/05/12 13:12, Liam R E Quin wrote: On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 12:38 -0700, Gary Aitken wrote: So two thoughts: 1. Should the integral behavior I am seeing with the up-arrow on the threshold for fuzzy select be going by tenths, or by whole integers? Neither, it depends on the width of the toolbox. It should go up or down by distance you drag as a percentage of the max value, times max value E.g. when the up arrow is one third the way along from the left of the scrollbar-thingy, clicking (or dragging at that point, it's the same) gives you one third of the maximum value. So, it's supposed to work as it does, I think. I don't think so. In the case of the paintbrush size, what is the max value? It is certainly not reached at the right boundary of the size slider, where it is ~1000. I can drag clear outside the slider to the right edge of the display and get it up to ~9500. The OP was requesting a manner in which to get integral values, which I think is the main frustration. When sizing a brush, for example, if I know the brush was designed as a 100x100 image, I often want to pick sizes in integral amounts. It's essentially impossible to do with the slider. In addition, once one attempts to do that, the value ends up at some fractional amount like 437.23 and you have to delete the decimal part to get back to whole integers. 2. It looks like the bug may be tool-related. What exactly are you saying is a bug? I'm not saying GIMP is bug-free :-) just trying to see if in fact it's a problem with how to use these controls not being obvious, or whether your gimp is behaving different from mine, or whether all the gimps in the world are misbehaving (always a possibility, especially near a full moon). From what you've described as the formula, I would say it may be mostly behaving as intended, modulo the max value issue and modulo the where is it supposed to be clamped on the right boundary issue. Outside of that, what I would question is whether that intention / design plays well in reality, given the desire for whole-number increments in many cases. BTW you've probably already seen I may have jumped the gun and filed a minor bug on this. My apologies. Could be a full moon thing, as I had a horse magically appear on the wrong side of a fence today. But I doubt it ;-) Gary ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question about the new sliders
On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 13:46 -0700, Gary Aitken wrote: On 12/05/12 13:12, Liam R E Quin wrote: I don't think so. In the case of the paintbrush size, what is the max value? The maximum value is 10,000. However, since your slider is probably less than 10,000 pixels wide, the approach taken seems to have been to use 1,000 as the maximum settable within the slider, but to let you continue dragging (or edit the number, or use the tiny increment button). It is certainly not reached at the right boundary of the size slider, where it is ~1000. I can drag clear outside the slider to the right edge of the display and get it up to ~9500. Right. The OP was requesting a manner in which to get integral values, which I think is the main frustration. Yes, you can't do that this way. I admit I usually use editable brushes, which are limited to square, diamond, circle, triangle, etc., and I have keys bound to increment-by-10, increment-by-1, and the same for decrement. I think wanting integer-only brush sizes would be an enhancement request, although I'm not sure I understand the motivation: scaling by a non-integral amount sometimes gives better results. But maybe integral brush sizes is just a thing I happen never to have wanted :) [...] From what you've described as the formula, I would say it may be mostly behaving as intended, modulo the max value issue and modulo the where is it supposed to be clamped on the right boundary issue. I think this is a feature and not a bug. BTW you've probably already seen I may have jumped the gun and filed a minor bug on this. My apologies. No need to apologise, but you might want to revisit the bug description and revise it if appropriate (I didn't check). Could be a full moon thing, as I had a horse magically appear on the wrong side of a fence today. But I doubt it ;-) :-) 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 The barefoot typographer - http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question about the new sliders
On 12/05/12 18:56, Liam R E Quin wrote: On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 17:25 -0700, Gary Aitken wrote: On 12/05/12 14:00, Liam R E Quin wrote: [...] I admit I usually use editable brushes, which are limited to square, diamond, circle, triangle, etc., and I have keys bound to increment-by-10, increment-by-1, and the same for decrement. likewise, without the bindings. I think wanting integer-only brush sizes would be an enhancement request, although I'm not sure I understand the motivation: scaling by a non-integral amount sometimes gives better results. But maybe integral brush sizes is just a thing I happen never to have wanted :) Not sure I understand that statement. You apparently use integral brush sizes enough to have bound keys to incrementing and decrementing by 1 and 10. That seems to imply you use integral brushes a lot, unless you always start with an odd-ball non-integer brush size. Am I missing something? Yes. I pretty much only use the dynamic (editable) brushes, and all I care about is the approximate size in most cases. I just looked, and my current brush has a size of 172.36, so pressing } will make it 182.36 and pressing ] will make it 173.36. They get to odd sizes because I might click anywhere on the Size slider. I also have $ and % bound to softer/harder by 10, and 4 and 5 for softer/harder by 1. Right now the brush hardness is 0.69. I'm not a graphic artist, but if you're designing an icon, for example, or a finely detailed map as a that you want as compact as possible, you sometimes want to minimize feathering, anti-aliasing, and everything else that results in partial colors of one form or another. Makes sense but it's a long way from cleaning up 2400dpi full-page scanned images for sale as stock :-) or from freehand painting, or from using dodge/burn on a photograph, where soft edges are needed. agreed; I don't do those pixel things very often, but others might. [...] If this is a feature, and if you can grant that wanting integral sizes has some utility, shouldn't that be relatively easy to attain by the user? I would submit that integral sizes, or something more integral than 0.01 increments for brush size in particular, is likely a common desire. I suppose for people doing professional pixel-level work it may be, that hadn't occurred to me. I don't mean to imply that one usage is better or more important than another. It might also be useful to be able to set the max and min values (max in particular). I suspect there are very few people who want a brush size more than 1000 (but hey, I don't design billboards). I used to recompile my own gimp with a larger maximum brush size, although I have not often used more than 400 pixels or so. Being able to set a maximum might help with Fitt's Law - quicker selection of the largest size. Even in a pixel context a square brush with a radius of 0.5 pixels makes sense to me though. So I'm not sure what is a good answer here. There's a paint tool options button to reset bitmap brushes to their native size, so maybe keybindings for tool presets would let you switch brush sizes with a single keypress? I agree a .5 radius makes sense; it's also a 1.0 diameter ;-). Dang, there's a conundrum -- brush Size should be labelled Radius or Max Extent (or something like that for non-circular type brushes). I may not be understanding correctly, but it seems like that would allow setting of specific sizes, not the whole range one might be interested in? What bothers me about the keybindings idea is that it is an accelerator, and the less-proficient / less-experienced with the specific tool user tends to use the mouse. Getting the desired behavior should be possible via the mouse. Going back to my original proposal, what downsides does it have? It requires no changes to the interface, some additions to preferences, and pretty simple changes to the guts of the generic slider. It allows arbitrary granularity and a pretty wide range of possibilities, and is relatively simple: valueDelta = ((float)deltaPtr / (float)maxPtr) * (valueExtent * 100.) / granularityX100; valueDelta = (float)((int)(valueDelta * 100) / granularityX100) * granularityX100 / 100.; newValue = value + valueDelta; e.g.: value=175.000 granularity=1.500 minValue=-100.000 maxValue=400.000 deltaPtr=15 maxPtr=1024 valueExtent=500.00 granularityX100=150 deltaPtr * valueExtent * 100 / maxPtr=732.421875 valueDelta / granularityX100=4.882812 valueDeltaX100=450.00 valueDelta=4.50 newValue=179.50 Gary ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Question about the new sliders
shaunak for...@gimpusers.com writes: The fast moving (up-arrow) slider appears when you have your mouse in the top half of the slider area. The slow moving (horizontal arrows) appear when you are in the lower half of the area. It is new behavior to learn, but it will become second nature eventually. Regards, Hey Jeff, Thank you so much for the reply. Now I feel stupid for asking the question. Its a pretty neat feature and actually helps me on my small screen! I guess I couldn't figure it out because the opacity bar starts at 100% :P Thanks again, Shaunak -- shaunak (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Question about text-to-path
I'm using GIMP 2.8 on Xubuntu 12.10. I have been going through the new manual trying out various features, was experimenting with text-to-path, and ran into a problem I can't seem to solve. In my test, I do the following: * Create a circular selection with the ellipse tool * Go to the Paths dialog and select selection to path * Select the text tool and enter the 26 characters a-z at 20 pt * I right-click in the text box and select Text along Path Only 18 characters, [a-r], are displayed. This seems to cover an arc of about 45-degrees. I undo, increase the text point size to 40 pt and reapply to the path and I get 19 characters, [a-s], covering an arc of about 95-degrees. I have tried this over and over and always get similar results. Regardless of how much text I enter, I only get a small initial portion displayed along the path. If I start over and create a long linear path with the path tool and then apply text to it, I still get the same truncated strings. Note: I do not have this problem with GIMP 2.6.11 on my Solaris system. Questions: 1: Any idea how I can get my entire text string to convert to the path, or is this a bug? 2: Any good reason why the Path from Text and Text along Path buttons were removed from the Text Tool Options menu? Thanks. -- Jeffery Small ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question about the new sliders
Hi, I just upgraded to the new version of GIMP and I am having trouble getting used to the new slider. I notice that there are two cursors that appear while using the new sliders. One is an up arrow that allows me to quickly change from 0 - 100 (Like the old slider) and another is the double side arrow cursor that makes only small changes. I can see how this is useful but I cant seem to figure out how to get one to show over the other. Currently I just swipe my mouse at the slider a couple of times till the right one doesn't show up. But clearly I am doing something wrong. Its hard for me to work with the two sided arrow as my screen is very small. (I am trying to adjust the opacity of the layer) It would be very helpful to me if someone linked me to a page describing the new sliders. The horozontial one appears when you are in the bottom 50% of the box, the vertical one appears once you pass the 50% mark. Just start at the bottom and move slowly up and you will see it change -- Owen -- Owen ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question About Gimp
On 12-05-15 03:00 PM, Candy wrote: I tried to get into the IRC to ask this question but I kept getting a 404 If you are getting a 404 you must be using some website as a gateway to IRC. Use a different IRC gateway site or, better still, use a program that properly supports IRC (such as Pidgin). -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |Nerds make the shiny things that distract Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're | powerful! #include disclaimer/favourite | --Chris Hardwick ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Question About Gimp
I tried to get into the IRC to ask this question but I kept getting a 404 message. My question isis filling with transparent the same as tinting? (explanation: In the image editor that Photobucket used to have I could change the color of something in a picture without losing the original shading, etc. They no longer have that image editor so I am looking for an Open Source program that is easy to use and has that feature.). Candy cjhe...@msn.com ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question About Gimp
2012/5/15 Candy cjhe...@msn.com: I tried to get into the IRC to ask this question but I kept getting a 404 message. My question isis filling with transparent the same as tinting? (explanation: In the image editor that Photobucket used to have I could change the color of something in a picture without losing the original shading, etc. They no longer have that image editor so I am looking for an Open Source program that is easy to use and has that feature.). You can use change a specific color to transparency with Image: Colors - Color to Alpha. If that's really what you mean. -- Olivier Lecarme ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Question Please
I want to download GIMP AND make a Donation. First I would like to know if GIMP has an image background burner? I am not too savvy about computers. Would you please just answer this one question, I will be glad to make a donation when I download. Sincerely, Adriane Simmons ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question Please
On 12.05.2012 20:52, asimmo...@beamspeed.net wrote: I want to download GIMP AND make a Donation. First I would like to know if GIMP has an image background burner? What is an image background burner? Regards, Michael ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] QUESTION OF ETHICS
Can anyone explain to me why GIMP allows their “FREE” software to be SOLD on eBay? There are those of us who have been cheated by sellers who, when you win the auction send you the URL for GIMP web page where you may download it for free I have complained to eBay but they will not do anything about it. RUSS MARSHALL 108 CHANNEL ROAD 2 ALPENA, MI. 49707 989.356.4934-HOME 989.766.3531-CELL russmarsh...@charter.net - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2425/4989 - Release Date: 05/10/12 ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] QUESTION OF ETHICS
On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:26:20 -0400, Russ Marshall wrote: Can anyone explain to me why GIMP allows their “FREE” software to be SOLD on eBay? Because the GPL license does not limit the freedom to sell the software. -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] QUESTION OF ETHICS
Well, I looked at some of the auctions of Gimp there, and one was for 99 cents, others for like 4 bucks highest i saw was 20 dollars. Some of these sales are packages including open office, etc. It's basically the price to get a version burned to a cd. It's like when I wanted to install Ubuntu, eventually I figured out how to download and burn a disk image, but in the meantime I had to buy a burner for 33 bucks. But back when I didn't have a burner or didn't readily know how to burn it I bought a Ubuntu disk for 4 dollars, well worth the cost. Dan On 5/10/12, Jay Smith j...@jaysmith.com wrote: On 05/10/2012 04:26 PM, Russ Marshall wrote: Can anyone explain to me why GIMP allows their “FREE” software to be SOLD on eBay? There are those of us who have been cheated by sellers who, when you win the auction send you the URL for GIMP web page where you may download it for free I have complained to eBay but they will not do anything about it. RUSS MARSHALL Russ, Gimp developers do not allow or not allow sales. The Gimp license does not prevent such activity. That is part of the whole open-source software world, it is not related only to Gimp. No, such activity is not honorable -- if the seller has not added any value to transaction, but since it is not a disallowed activity, it is not illegal. Whether it is ethical or not is a decision above my pay grade. I don't like it, but even vultures and possums have their role in the world. However... I believe strongly -- and I do apply this thinking to myself as well -- that one should first look to oneself before deciding to blame others. Did you know that you were buying Gimp? Did you know what you were going to be receiving? If you did know that you were buying Gimp, did you research it (doing a simple Google search would have told you everything) before bidding on it. Or, if you did not know what product you were buying, why did you bid on it? All these types of questions should perhaps be considered before blaming everybody else. If you were not previously aware of Gimp and you did not do any research to find Gimp (or other free / open-source software), then perhaps the eBay seller did actually provide some value for the price they charged -- in a devious kind of way, they have introduced you to the wonderful world of Gimp. If Gimp cost $200 or $500, it would still be worth it to _many_ people, myself included. So, perhaps this is just a life lesson: Know exactly what you are bidding on, research alternative sources before bidding, etc., etc. By the way, there is a huge and wonderful world of free / open-source software around there. Explore that world and you will find a lot of great, free programs you had no idea existed. Jay ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] QUESTION OF ETHICS
On 12-05-10 06:06 PM, Daniel Smith wrote: It's like when I wanted to install Ubuntu, eventually I figured out how to download and burn a disk image, but in the meantime I had to buy a burner for 33 bucks. But back when I didn't have a burner or didn't readily know how to burn it I bought a Ubuntu disk for 4 dollars, well worth the cost. Its one thing if the seller is providing some service by providing the software on a CD/DVD or if they have added something to the package (ie. additional plug-ins/scripts). If all the seller is doing is charging for the URL where the software can be downloaded for free, the sellers ethics and/or morals are definitely questionable. If nothing more than a URL was given for the money, you should consider leaving negative feedback with a notice like Selling software available free at url. If the seller doesn't like that, you could agree to mutually withdraw if you are reimbursed the original purchase price. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |Nerds make the shiny things that distract Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're | powerful! #include disclaimer/favourite | --Chris Hardwick ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Steve Kinney ad...@pilobilus.net wrote: Long story short, Yes we can. :and that's why I love using GIMP :) Cheers, Dana_H ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Question
Can I use GIMP to make EarthMandalas a la http://www.earthmandalas.com/ We don't have photoshop and thought GIMP might be a good alternative. Thoughts welcome. Thanks Scanned for The Silkwood School by (http://netboxblue.com/) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] Question
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Alicia Kemp wrote: Can I use GIMP to make EarthMandalas a la http://www.earthmandalas.com/ Calling it a mandala is a bit of exxageration :) Nevertheless, yes -- you can do that with GIMP Selecting the first sector from the photo is going to be difficult with GIMP. I'd recommend using Inkscape to draw the circle's sector with the Circle tool (Ctrl+Shift+drag to draw a perfect circle, then drag the right handle and input the exact angle you need in the top toolbar with the tool's settings). Copy the sector to clipboard, in GIMP go to the Paths dockable dialog, right-click for contextual menu and use Paste a Path command. Then select the newly pasted path, move it to desirable location and convert it to selection )bottom toolbar of the Paths dialog). Before rotating, move each new piece of the mandala so that its corner with the smallest radius is right on top of a likewise corner of the adjacent piece. Then when you rotate, there will be a handle in the center of the layer which is the rotation center. Move it to that very corner with the smallest radius. That way you will be able to make perfect alignment of pieces. That's beginning to sound like a complete tutorial mostly because the author pf the original tutorial at http://www.earthmandalas.com did a lousy job at explaining things. Otherwise you'd be able to repeat 80% of the actions as is. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] Question about brush size in 2.7 - can the tool size be linked to the brush size?
I've been using 2.6 for a while, and have started using 2.7. Many of the improvements (layer groups, single window mode) are amazingly better, thank you so much! I have my mouse wheel bound to some brush parameters, including size hardness. However, it looks like tools have their own size now. Is there a way to bind my mouse wheel to the current tool's size? If not, is there a way to link the tool size to the brush size? It seems strange to have a brush size that the tools completely ignore - is the brush size even needed at that point? Thanks! ___ gimp-user-list mailing list gimp-user-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
