When I started using the Gimp, I was about as stupid as they come. I
even learned linux (what little I know) from the Gimp up. I am not as
stupid about the Gimp now, but that is about as far as I will go.
I learned the word alpha from that bottom layer being what it is.
It has become pesky t
Carey Bunks wrote:
>
> I seem to remember that this is the way PhotoShop does it (I'm going
> to check on this later tonight), and that would probably be a good
> enough reason not to fiddle with this.
Photoshop furnished Gimp with UI scaffold, but Wilbur is a big boy
now and can have his own h
On Tue, May 16, 2000 at 05:42:54PM +0200, David Necas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> NO, please.
>
> `Special' background layer maybe isn't very intuitive, but automatical
> promoting has the same problem: it's based on a side-effect and it's not
gimp automatically promotes layers on a variety of
On Tue, 16 May 2000, Jens Lautenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Quinet) writes:
> > I still haven't found a good reason to keep the background layer
> > "special" when the image contains multiple layers. If the only
> > reasons are historical or to copy the features
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Quinet) writes:
> On Tue, 16 May 2000, Jens Lautenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I would say, simply make a layer by default have alpha always... I
> > know I know it's more memory for that 0.001 % of cases where people
> > start with one background layer an
May I make a humble suggestion.
Change File->New to allow users to select a Fill Type of either
Background w/o alpha
Background w/ alpha
Then users can select what they want to begin with. Flatten and Add Alpha
Channel can still exist as is in the Layers menu. No automatic
behind-the-scenes sw
On Tue, 16 May 2000, Jens Lautenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Quinet) writes:
> > I would even go as far as removing the "Add Alpha Channel" option from
> > the menus, and suggest that the prefered method to add transparency to
> > an image that has only one layer
On Tue, 16 May 2000, David Necas wrote:
> > Making the background layer "special" is not very intuitive.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> NO, please.
> The only good solution is probably to make `Add Alpha Channel' more
> intuitive. The user should _see_ the background layer is spec
> ...
>
> It should be easy add an alpha channel to the background layer as soon
> as a second layer is added to the image. Is there a reason why this
> should not be done automatically?
>
> I think that it would make things easier to understand for the user.
> Making the background layer "speci
> [about not making background special wrt alpha]
>
> What do you think?
YES please. this is simply annoying.
> I would even go as far as removing the "Add Alpha Channel" option from
> the menus, and suggest that the prefered method to add transparency to
> an image that ha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raphael Quinet) writes:
> [about not making background special wrt alpha]
>
> What do you think?
YES please. this is simply annoying.
> I would even go as far as removing the "Add Alpha Channel" option from
> the menus, and suggest that the prefered method to add transparenc
I just saw an article in comp.graphics.apps.gimp (in the thread with
the subject "White balance tool?") that starts describing a method
with these words: "use the color picker on the 'white' color,
duplicate the background layer, delete the original, add a layer..."
I had to read that twice to und
12 matches
Mail list logo
