OK-
Here is a file containing three scripts that all end up under the Layer menus.
Load a new File Linked Layer (loads up an image as a layer and sets
the layer name to "@FL@".)
Reload All File Linked Layers (looks though all the layers for ones
where the name starts with the "@FL@" flag and relo
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 9:32 PM, kevin wrote:
> The feature is mainly for the possibility of having "templates". The
> idea is that you can place a layer that is a link to a certain image, so
> you can have 9 layers on top of each other and each one being an image.
> The idea is that you no longer
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 5:32 AM, kevin wrote:
> The idea is that you no longer have to "Load image as layer" every time
> you change an image because the layer would be the image and would
> update itself.
Sounds like request for XCFv2/OpenRaste/whatever :)
Alexandre
Well I am glad to hear that it is relatively easy but unfortunately I
haven't gotten into scripting with gimp at all... Although, this is
definitely going to push me to learn it so I can get this feature ( and
various other reasons ). But, as a feature, I still think it would be a
helpful add e
Not sure I understand your desired workflow. You say when you "change
an image" the layer updates. How do you change an image? Outside
gimp? It would be very possible to script some of this... For
example, if the layer name were the full path to an image, a script
command to "reload the layer" w
kevin wrote:
> I have been using GIMP for a few months now and there is a feature that
> I have wanted to have and think about every time I open up GIMP.
>
> The feature is mainly for the possibility of having "templates". The
> idea is that you can place a layer that is a link to a certain ima
I have been using GIMP for a few months now and there is a feature that
I have wanted to have and think about every time I open up GIMP.
The feature is mainly for the possibility of having "templates". The
idea is that you can place a layer that is a link to a certain image, so
you can have 9
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Daniel Johannsen
wrote:
> Hi,
> yes, your assumption is right. I start the painting process with layers
> only for shapes and silhouettes.
> Then i add a "layer group" with the mask property (or in photoshop-terms
> a group of "clipping mask"-layers)
> to each of
yahvuu schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Daniel Johannsen schrieb:
>
>> I only like to add, that in the layer group it is the alpha value of the
>> lowest layer in the group
>> which provides the masking effect for the grouped layers above.
>> (And not a layer in the middle or on top of the group.)
>>
>
>
Hi,
Daniel Johannsen schrieb:
> I only like to add, that in the layer group it is the alpha value of the
> lowest layer in the group
> which provides the masking effect for the grouped layers above.
> (And not a layer in the middle or on top of the group.)
hmm, special-casing the bottom layer see
yahvuu schrieb:
> Hi all,
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Daniel Johannsen
> wrote:
>
>> Solution suggestion: A parent base layer determines alpha values for a
>> dependent stack of child layers above the base layer.
>> Then the last layer on top of the child stack e.g. could be the
>> "a
yahvuu schrieb:
Hi all,
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Daniel Johannsen
wrote:
Solution suggestion: A parent base layer determines alpha values for a
dependent stack of child layers above the base layer.
Then the last layer on top of the child stack e.g. could be the
"athmosph
yahvuu wrote:
> i wonder, is what you're proposing the same as the 'group layers
> masks' described in
>
https://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-developer/2009-April/022118.html ?
>
> Is this already covered by
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51112 ?
In photoshop it is a single
Hi all,
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Daniel Johannsen
wrote:
> Solution suggestion: A parent base layer determines alpha values for a
> dependent stack of child layers above the base layer.
> Then the last layer on top of the child stack e.g. could be the
> "athmosphere color" for the silhou
Problem: Painting (e.g. with wacom-board) complex athmospheric
perspective with overlapping objects.
Solution suggestion: A parent base layer determines alpha values for a
dependent stack of child layers above the base layer.
Then the last layer on top of the child stack e.g. could be the
"athm
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 5:47 PM, David Gowers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Kent Tenney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Howdy,
>>
>> I wish the gimp-curves-tool.settings file, which contains sections
>> starting with:
>>
>> (GimpCurvesConfig "2008-10-03 14:34:26
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Kent Tenney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> I wish the gimp-curves-tool.settings file, which contains sections
> starting with:
>
> (GimpCurvesConfig "2008-10-03 14:34:26"
>(time 1223062466)
>(channel value)
>(curve
>...
>
> also listed
Howdy,
I wish the gimp-curves-tool.settings file, which contains sections
starting with:
(GimpCurvesConfig "2008-10-03 14:34:26"
(time 1223062466)
(channel value)
(curve
...
also listed the name of the file (or 'unnamed')
fully qualified would be great, bare would be fine.
Than
Hi,
I've just been playing a bit with 2.6, and have a request.
When the last image is closed, the no-image-open window snaps back to
whatever size it was before the first image was opened - which is great.
Could we take that further and make it snap back to its previous
position, as well a
Hi,
On Sun, 2007-11-11 at 01:41 -0700, Joe Eagar wrote:
> Though I suppose suggesting it on IRC might be more appropriate then on
> the list. Is that what you meant?
No, I only meant that filing enhancement requests for this is a waste of
time unless more information can be provided.
Sven
Martin Nordholts wrote:
> Hi Joe
>
> Suggesting a new feature without specifying how the algorithm behind it
> work is pointless because how could the feature then be implemented?
> There are way too many other things to use the sparse GIMP developer
> resources for than to research details of othe
Joe Eagar wrote:
> Sven Neumann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:37 -0500, Daniel Falk wrote:
>>
>>> Photoshop has a tool that works like the healing brush except that it
>>> doesn't require a source region to be specified before using the tool.
>>> When there are a lot of quick touc
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:37 -0500, Daniel Falk wrote:
>
>> Photoshop has a tool that works like the healing brush except that it
>> doesn't require a source region to be specified before using the tool.
>> When there are a lot of quick touch-ups to do, this is very
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 19:29 -0500, Daniel Falk wrote:
> > Since we don't know how this works in detail, there is not much point in
> > suggesting that we add such a feature.
>
> I could find a video for anyone interested, but that really wasn't my
> point. I suggested the feature not simply
On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 09:30 +0100, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:37 -0500, Daniel Falk wrote:
> > Photoshop has a tool that works like the healing brush except that it
> > doesn't require a source region to be specified before using the tool.
> > When there are a lot of q
Hi,
On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:37 -0500, Daniel Falk wrote:
> Photoshop has a tool that works like the healing brush except that it
> doesn't require a source region to be specified before using the tool.
> When there are a lot of quick touch-ups to do, this is very convenient.
>
> Photoshop someho
Photoshop has a tool that works like the healing brush except that it
doesn't require a source region to be specified before using the tool.
When there are a lot of quick touch-ups to do, this is very convenient.
Photoshop somehow guesses what it should use as source material and is
often accurate
David Gowers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Anyway, if you give a link to a paper describing the exact workings of
> the algorithym, then it's much more likely that something will get
> done in relation to it.
It seems to be fairly straightforward and the results are beautiful. The
related paper is
On 8/22/07, Thomas Lytje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am not sure you take feature requests like this, - but try to take a look.
> It seems quite cool.
> I don't know enough about image processing (but I am a software engineer)
> but to me it looks like it wouldn't be to hard to implement. Hopefu
I am not sure you take feature requests like this, - but try to take a look.
It seems quite cool.
I don't know enough about image processing (but I am a software engineer)
but to me it looks like it wouldn't be to hard to implement. Hopefully there
isn't a lot of patens making it impossible
See:
h
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 09:33:45PM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 10:38 +0200, Marco Ciampa wrote:
>
> > Why not to bring all the GIMP windows up over all the others windows when I
> > clic on to one of the many GIMP windows?
>
> Because it isn't trivial to do that. Y
Hi,
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 10:38 +0200, Marco Ciampa wrote:
> Why not to bring all the GIMP windows up over all the others windows when I
> clic on to one of the many GIMP windows?
Because it isn't trivial to do that. You can try the transient windows
option in the Preferences dialog of a recent
Tim Jedlicka writes:
> On 7/2/06, Marco Ciampa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Why not to bring all the GIMP windows up over all the others windows when
> >I clic on to one of the many GIMP windows?
>
> While in the image window - try a Shift-Tab (it may just be my window
> manager (gnome/gdm)), but
On 7/2/06, Marco Ciampa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When I use GIMP, if I temporarly open another program, when I want to returnto GIMP, I have to manually re-clic on to every gimp windows (toolbox,images,layers, etc.) that I covered with the windows of the other program
Why not to bring all the GIM
This is my first post here and I'm a newbie in english language and gimp too
so, please do not bite me! :-)
I'm writing here because I'm thinking to post a feature request on the gimp
bugzilla but I'm not shure. It seems too simple a request so I'm asking myself
if there is a really stupid reason
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Quinet) writes:
> On 08 Jan 2002, Michael Natterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The only feature I miss when I use GIMP is that of Photoshop's brush
> > > cursors. In Photoshop, when you choose a 12pixel brush, your cursor becomes
>
On 08 Jan 2002, Michael Natterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The only feature I miss when I use GIMP is that of Photoshop's brush
> > cursors. In Photoshop, when you choose a 12pixel brush, your cursor becomes
> > a 12pixel sphere (or whatever shape of the brush)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello Gimp Devel.
>
> First off, I started playing with GIMP 1.3 last night and it is awsome. The
> 1.4 stable series is going to be amazing.
Thanks ;)
> I wanted to take this oppertunity, early in the devel work on 1.3 to restate
> an old nagging feature request
On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 11:44:09 -0800
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent:
> Hello Gimp Devel.
>
> First off, I started playing with GIMP 1.3 last night and it is awsome.
The> 1.4 stable series is going to be amazing.
>
> I wanted to take this oppertunity, early in the devel work on 1.3 to
restate> an old na
"Stephen J Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[...] It's
>not as simple as setting the X cursor to the right thing because when
>you are zoomed right in and painting with a huge brush, you can end
>up with a cursor that covers half the screen!
For X11, using the ordinary cursor up the maximum siz
On Mon, 7 Jan 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The only feature I miss when I use GIMP is that of Photoshop's brush
> cursors.
I'll second that one. It's a pain not knowing where your brush will
land - ESPECIALLY because when the image is zoomed in or out, the brush
size can be much larger or sm
Hello Gimp Devel.
First off, I started playing with GIMP 1.3 last night and it is awsome. The
1.4 stable series is going to be amazing.
I wanted to take this oppertunity, early in the devel work on 1.3 to restate
an old nagging feature request of mine:
The only feature I miss when I use GIMP is
42 matches
Mail list logo