Re: [Gimp-user] Path Tool Annoyances
> Please note that you are currently taking part in the process of looking > at it. The remarks above seem a bit unjustified when people are trying > to help you to achieve your goal faster... I apologize. This isn't the first time I've brought up path problems in gimp and it always seems to end up being pointed to Inkscape. It was knee-jerk and uncalled for. > That being said, I still think that a vector drawing program is more > adequate for that kind of uses. You gain editability, being able to see > the result (the stroke) as you draw, resolution-independence, etc. > I do appreciate your suggestion, but for simple paths I really do prefer gimp. Everything else I do with the image is done in gimp so It saves time, generates less files, and it has served me well for many years. Any path/vector function at all is better served in Inkscape for sure, but gimp has a path tool exactly for simplistic path creations like this. I just want to regain the functionality gimp used to have. Sorry for the sharp remark. -- akovia ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
El sáb, 20-02-2016 a las 13:12 -0500, akovia escribió: > > It just strikes me funny that there is a built in excuse to not > improve, > or fix bugs for the path tool. > "Use Inkscape" Not at all. I'm just a user like you. I honestly think that Inkscape is a more appropriate tool for what you're trying to do than GIMP. > It's not a bad excuse for sure, but when functionality is going > backwards, I would think it should be looked at and fixed if > possible. As I mentioned in my message, I agree that the problem you found needs to be addressed. It looks like a bug and it means that it could keep somebody from doing what they need with GIMP, so it has to be fixed. That being said, I still think that a vector drawing program is more adequate for that kind of uses. You gain editability, being able to see the result (the stroke) as you draw, resolution-independence, etc. Gez. ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
Am 20.02.2016 um 19:12 schrieb akovia: > It just strikes me funny that there is a built in excuse to not improve, > or fix bugs for the path tool. > "Use Inkscape" > It's not a bad excuse for sure, but when functionality is going > backwards, I would think it should be looked at and fixed if possible. Please note that you are currently taking part in the process of looking at it. The remarks above seem a bit unjustified when people are trying to help you to achieve your goal faster... -- Regards, Michael GPG: 96A8 B38A 728A 577D 724D 60E5 F855 53EC B36D 4CDD ___ 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] How to shrink photo, retain quality?? Business card design
El lun, 15-02-2016 a las 10:35 -0500, Rick Strong escribió: > As always, the best thing to do is work closely with your printer and > give > them what they want. In that case, the only program capable of producing such PDF is Scribus (inkscape can't export CMYK PDF). It's important to note that you don't need to convert the images using a different application. You can create your artwork and images in RGB and let scribus do the conversion to CMYK during the PDF export. In Scribus, when you choose "Printer" as output for PDF, it will convert all the assets (swatches and images) to CMYK, even when they are RGB in your working document. It's also important to note that different PDF and PDF/X versions allow different color models. Some of them allow only CMYK, others allow CMYK or RGB, and other even allow to have both, RGB and CMYK elements in the same document. In my experience, woring in scribus with RGB and then exporting from PDF version 1.4 and choosing "printer" as output produces a solid PDF that every print shop will accept without questions. The upcoming versions of Scribus will allow PDF/X, which is a variant of PDF specially taylored for printing, but meanwhile the settings offered above are fine. Just keep in mind to set the right color profiles in the color management section of the preferences so the conversions are properly managed, according to the colorspace provided by your print supplier. TL;DR: Use Scribus, export PDF 1.4, choose "printer" as output and don't convert stuff to CMYK, Scribus will do it for anything that is not in the printer colorspace already. BTW, since this is the GIMP mailing list, keep in mind that you can produce files for print from GIMP, but you can't produce a CMYK PDF. You can, however, produce a CMYK TIFF file with GIMP and the Separate+ Plugin that should be acceptable f Gez. ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
> I agree with Rick. Although this issue needs to be taken care of, GIMP > doesn't seem the most appropriate tool for the work you're doing. > As long as GIMP doesn't have a vector layer feature, the strokes > produced with this technique will be always resolution-dependent, which > is not really useful for what you're doing (i.e. if your source image > is low resolution, your strokes will be low-res too, and you won't be > able to scale them up keeping detail and smoothness). > > Use inkscape instead, it will work better and you'll keep the > editability of the strokes all the time. > That's fine. I'll just keep working around the issue as needed. I don't stroke very often, so when I do I can weigh my options then. For the work I'm doing, gimp has been the perfect tool. I can use gimp's features to find edges, give contrast, and many other functions on the fly while tracing a path. I also have no need to scale up after making a path for this work. I always start with the largest source I can find and always scale down from there. Not having to switch between programs saves me a lot of time. When I need to create a vector image, or have use for angled guides, I will then fire up Inkscape. It just strikes me funny that there is a built in excuse to not improve, or fix bugs for the path tool. "Use Inkscape" It's not a bad excuse for sure, but when functionality is going backwards, I would think it should be looked at and fixed if possible. My 2 cents. -- akovia ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
El vie, 19-02-2016 a las 18:56 -0500, Rick Strong escribió: > "Inkscape", another free program, was recommended to me for vector > work. > Check it out. > > Rick I agree with Rick. Although this issue needs to be taken care of, GIMP doesn't seem the most appropriate tool for the work you're doing. As long as GIMP doesn't have a vector layer feature, the strokes produced with this technique will be always resolution-dependent, which is not really useful for what you're doing (i.e. if your source image is low resolution, your strokes will be low-res too, and you won't be able to scale them up keeping detail and smoothness). Use inkscape instead, it will work better and you'll keep the editability of the strokes all the time. Gez ___ 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] How to shrink photo, retain quality?? Business card design
El lun, 15-02-2016 a las 10:35 -0500, Rick Strong escribió: > As always, the best thing to do is work closely with your printer and > give > them what they want. In that case, the only program capable of producing such PDF is Scribus (inkscape can't export CMYK PDF). It's important to note that you don't need to convert the images using a different application. You can create your artwork and images in RGB and let scribus do the conversion to CMYK during the PDF export. In Scribus, when you choose "Printer" as output for PDF, it will convert all the assets (swatches and images) to CMYK, even when they are RGB in your working document. It's also important to note that different PDF and PDF/X versions allow different color models. Some of them allow only CMYK, others allow CMYK or RGB, and other even allow to have both, RGB and CMYK elements in the same document. In my experience, woring in scribus with RGB and then exporting from PDF version 1.4 and choosing "printer" as output produces a solid PDF that every print shop will accept without questions. The upcoming versions of Scribus will allow PDF/X, which is a variant of PDF specially taylored for printing, but meanwhile the settings offered above are fine. Just keep in mind to set the right color profiles in the color management section of the preferences so the conversions are properly managed, according to the colorspace provided by your print supplier. TL;DR: Use Scribus, export PDF 1.4, choose "printer" as output and don't convert stuff to CMYK, Scribus will do it for anything that is not in the printer colorspace already. BTW, since this is the GIMP mailing list, keep in mind that you can produce files for print from GIMP, but you can't produce a CMYK PDF. You can, however, produce a CMYK TIFF file with GIMP and the Separate+ Plugin that should be acceptable for printing (unless it has a lot of small text, in which case a vector format is more suitable and easier to handle). Gez. ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
> > Shot in the dark: Have you tried just using the Lasso tool - which > > will also play connect the dots - to make selections, then convert > > the selection to a path? If that works it might point to other > > options in the "area selection" arena that could be useful. > > > > I might play with that later just for the heck of it... I think I misunderstood what you were suggesting here. I get it now and might give it a shot. ;) -- akovia ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
On 02/20/2016 10:35 AM, akovia wrote: >> When turning sharp corners, I zoom in and place the corner node's handles on the lines leading away from the vertex. > This is exactly the problem. The only way to ensure this is to zoom in > to almost max extents on every single node. This is very cumbersome and > time consuming and was not required before. I've already done a few > things with my workflow to try and compensate for this, especially if I > know ahead of time I will be stoking the path, but it's been difficult > to completely change everything about how I work after doing it > successfully for years a certain way without problems. Aha. That's a challenging one. Shot in the dark: Have you tried just using the Lasso tool - which will also play connect the dots - to make selections, then convert the selection to a path? If that works it might point to other options in the "area selection" arena that could be useful. I might play with that later just for the heck of it... :o) ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
> The problem could be a result of drawing curves with too many nodes: > When drawing with Bezier curves, I consider a node without handles > a redundant node. I always try to use the least amount of nodes necessary, but there are times when tracing around a low res image with lots of jaggedness like a straw hat, where I will just trace around by placing nodes instead of trying to pull out every handle a micrometer. I do think this is more about workflow though. Some people will place a node and adjust the path for that node right then. Rinse, repeat. I tend to place all my nodes first and then come back around and adjust the path. It's when laying down my "outline" nodes that the handles get pulled out from time to time. When I come back to adjust my paths, there are times like on straight lines where a path doesn't appear to need adjusted so I just move past it. Not until I try my stroke do I find out that a handle is out. > When turning sharp corners, I zoom in and place the corner node's handles on > the lines leading away from the vertex. This is exactly the problem. The only way to ensure this is to zoom in to almost max extents on every single node. This is very cumbersome and time consuming and was not required before. I've already done a few things with my workflow to try and compensate for this, especially if I know ahead of time I will be stoking the path, but it's been difficult to completely change everything about how I work after doing it successfully for years a certain way without problems. The other part of my workflow is that I tend to grab the path itself and not the handle for some adjustments. If I do this now and don't grab the path very close to the base of a node, it will inevitably drag out the opposing nodes handle ever so slightly, but you really don't see it happening while working. I've been working hard to only adjust a path by pulling out the handle explicitly, but my muscle memory is hard to overcome. :P > The errors I see when stroking paths usually happen when paths turn > sharp corners; this is fixable by adjusting the mitre limit in the > stroke style dialog. I have had to tweak this fairly often when > stroking the perimeter of vectorized text elements. It may be > possible to use this adjustment to remove unwanted kinks when > stroking paths where nodes have 'unintended' handles. > I've used this adjustment quite a bit for text like yourself, unfortunately I am not seeing any difference when using it for this problem. If this can't be fixed to work like it used to be, maybe something can be done to change the nodes to visibly show when a handle is out by changing the color or something? Here is the workfile for the example I posted above. It's a big file but this is the scale I'm usually working with. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/93550827/temp/Mnemosyne%20-%20Render.xcf -- akovia ___ 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] Path Tool Annoyances
Hello all, I'm not sure I understand the problem described here, but it sounds like the GIMP is creating handles on new nodes on Bezier curves where no handles are desired, causing visible errors when the path is stroked. I make and stroke Beziers fairly often but have not seen the problem described. The problem could be a result of drawing curves with too many nodes: When drawing with Bezier curves, I consider a node without handles a redundant node. When turning sharp corners, I zoom in and place the corner node's handles on the lines leading away from the vertex. The errors I see when stroking paths usually happen when paths turn sharp corners; this is fixable by adjusting the mitre limit in the stroke style dialog. I have had to tweak this fairly often when stroking the perimeter of vectorized text elements. It may be possible to use this adjustment to remove unwanted kinks when stroking paths where nodes have 'unintended' handles. :o) Steve ___ 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
