Join images into a single multi-image file. Unless otherwise noted, each option is recognized by the commands: convert and mogrify. If you want a description of a particular option, click on the option name in the navigation bar above and you will go right to it. If I haven't gone completely crazy yet, we can clearly see a difference of behavior of the opacity tool in the final result between theses two versions of Gimp.Īnd I'd like to understand it properly to retrieve my habits or to change it if I have to change it.Below is list of command-line options recognized by the ImageMagick command-line tools. One important thing I notice when doing this comparison is this time : my layer in the middle need to be at 16% to match the aspect of the Gimp 2.8 version. I work with black background supposing it'll have the same aspect on black background when I'll export it in transparent. Again, consider the final of the final is to put it in some black background on website. What bothers me and confuses me is this time, the render will DEPENDS ON the state of the black background layer (visible or not). This time, the same thing but with Gimp 2.10. But, I know that if I re-place it in on some black background (or not that's the point, I start from 100% black but in the final it could be a black gradient background, a white / black photo.), it will have the same result as I used to work on the software. But when I finish, I delete the black background so it lefts transparent and I export it in PNG. To be more precise of my work habits : to create some little logos, images with a little bit a stylization of this kind, I use to work on black background (because global graphics of my website tend towards grey/black). On Gimp 2.8, whatever the state of the black background layer (visible or not), the render will be THE SAME on a dark background after I put it somewhere in PNG. I'm web developper (but not designer no kiding), so suppose it's a website where the background-color is black. In the middle, it's the famous "low opacity layer" at 60%. I redownload Gimp 2.8 to make the comparison. There is a different philosophy of handling layer opacity between versions. I don't know if it's better or not, but what is certain is that it changes somehow. PixLab Wrote: This behavior did not change with GIMP 2.10 What you describe and solutions you offer is not what I'm concern. I think there is a misunderstanding somewhere because we don't talk about the same thing. You can even check that your image has retain proper transparency on website like imgur (it's your image from the. Look below I did put your image test in a directory/folder, exported as PNG without the black background, thus it has transparency, I increased the thumbnail view to 400% of this Folder and changed the background of this very-folder and you can even see that the thumbnail made by my OS retains the correct transparency with that slight blur from your image test.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |