On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Graeme Gill
Hi,
it appears that the util.h values are from a draft of the
IEC sRGB standard, not the final one.
Elle Stone wrote:
The standard values are: 0.04045 and 0.0031308.
The util.h values are: 0.03928 and 0.0030402477.
Let's see:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:50:11AM +0200, Karl-Heinz Zimmer wrote:
Hi Mario,
Marco,
I am not sure if this info is helpfull or not - just referring to your
proposal to report here:
Parts of the German version manual seem to not be in German yet, e.g.:
Joao:
Read the article!
My guess is that the SR scheme combines two things:
1) Look for similar things at the same scale within the image to
reconstruct a platonic ideal which you then replicate (this is
super-resolution using data from the same image; classical
super-resolution uses multiple
On 23 August 2012 08:55, Nicolas Robidoux nicolas.robid...@gmail.com wrote:
Before starting to program SR, I would also contact the authors and ask
1) If they are, or know people who are, willing to help
2) If there are patents that get in the way.
On the other hand - how is your work going?
On the other hand - how is your work going? Are you making it avalilable as a
GEGL OP as well?
Yes, that's always been the plan. But everything else I do has been
taking a lot longer than expected...
At least, I think that I've come to the point where my methods are
just about as good as they
One last grumpy comment: Look at the right nostril of the baby. It's
pure fiction.
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
Sorry: Left nostril.
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
On 23 August 2012 09:07, Nicolas Robidoux nicolas.robid...@gmail.com wrote:
One last grumpy comment: Look at the right nostril of the baby. It's
pure fiction.
Since we are to this - one of the thigns that had impressed me the
most is the border of the yellow helmets
of the workers - on one of
Congratulations Mitch and team!! Thanks for all the Mac fixes.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Michael Natterer mi...@gimp.org wrote:
Hi,
GIMP 2.8.2 has been released. This is a bugfix release
in the stable 2.8 series, no new features were added.
For a complete list of changes since 2.8.2
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 06:13:16PM -0400, Partha Bagchi wrote:
Congratulations Mitch and team!! Thanks for all the Mac fixes.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Michael Natterer mi...@gimp.org wrote:
Hi,
GIMP 2.8.2 has been released. This is a bugfix release
in the stable 2.8 series, no
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:08:05PM +0200, Michael Natterer wrote:
Hi,
GIMP 2.8.2 has been released. This is a bugfix release
in the stable 2.8 series, no new features were added.
For a complete list of changes since 2.8.2 please see the Changes
section below. Also see the release notes of
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:44:28AM +0200, Marco Ciampa wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:08:05PM +0200, Michael Natterer wrote:
Overview of Changes from GIMP 2.8.0 to GIMP 2.8.2
You mean from GIMP 2.8.1 to GIMP 2.8.2 ?
^
Sorry, I posted without thinking...
Since
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Marco Ciampa ciam...@libero.it wrote:
Since with GIMP 2.6.x series there was no even only releases, I should
assume that it is changed the versioning scheme for stable/even
unstable/odd even for 3rd point releases, so the next stable 2.8 release
will be 2.8.4?
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 06:19:34PM -0500, Chris Mohler wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Marco Ciampa ciam...@libero.it wrote:
Since with GIMP 2.6.x series there was no even only releases, I should
assume that it is changed the versioning scheme for stable/even
unstable/odd even for
You are correct, Marco.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Marco Ciampa ciam...@libero.it wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 06:19:34PM -0500, Chris Mohler wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Marco Ciampa ciam...@libero.it wrote:
Since with GIMP 2.6.x series there was no even only releases,
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Marco Ciampa ciam...@libero.it wrote:
So what? Where is the 2.8.1 version gone?
The new version was so good it got +2.
Chris
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
On 24.08.12 01:20 Marco Ciampa wrote:
So what? Where is the 2.8.1 version gone?
Odd third numbers now indicate snapshot releases. Those are public, but
unofficial, builds between two official releases with even third
numbers. They contain the latest stable release plus some patches. AFAIK
17 matches
Mail list logo
