I have an image which i would like to measure the pixel intensity along a specific vector. I do not want the total pixel intensity for the entire image, i would like to draw a line, ie with the measurement tool and get a graph showing the pixel intensity as you travel along that line.
View 5 Replies
Is it possible in GIMP to equalize the intensity of different pictures? So that the pictures have the same brightness and that the color curves (histogram) are identical?
View 1 Replies View RelatedIs there any trick to increase the intensity of the "highlight" option of the crop tool?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI managed to remove the background, of an image,(A whit background) and put the image on top of a transparent layer. made a transparent image. When I place this image over a light color background, it looks fine, but when I place it over a dark color background, the edge of the image looks very rough and dirty, I think it's because some of the anti alias from the original image, how can I make it a clean image without going to delete pixel by pixel?
View 2 Replies View Related We are developing an application using functionality of Gimp´s channel mixer with java.
Our problem is that we don’t Know how channel mix works exactly for transforming pixel by pixel in Java.
For example,
We have an image an do on it the next mix:
Output Channel = Red
Red=200.0
Green=0.0
Blue=0.0
For simulate that, we transform all pixels with Red Component *2 and 255 (maximum) if is greater.
Our problem is:
Output Channel = Red
Red=200.0
Green=60.0
Blue=0.0
How can I simulate that?
When I drag around vector points of paths they are not constrained to the pixel grid, when the option "Snap Vector Tools and Transform to Pixel Grid" is off. This is the behavior I expect.BUT: When I drag whole paths, they snap to the pixel grid, no matter what. I even have snapping completely disabled.
This is particularly annoying when eg. creating a path for a zipper. I first make a path for the inside of the jacket or whatever, then I make one notch for the zipper and copy it over and over again for all the notches. It's very troubling when these elements snap to the pixel grid, because it's very unprecise then.
I've been using for a while and still haven't found a way to vectorize graphics. I can't really think of a "professional" way to ask this, but is there any way to change medium of preference to vector?
I figure if a less prestigious program like Corel can render in vector and if Adobe's little flash program can manage it, there has to be a way to switch from pixel to vector graphics in Photoshop.
I don't mean rasterize or vector mask. I'm already working at 500 dpi to minimize the jitter from my unsteady pen hand, but working in vector would be ideal for me so my linearts cease to look like they were drawn by a crack addict in withdrawal. =/
If anyone knows how I can switch mediums, or if there's a plugin that can make the switch for me, let me know.
Is there any option in cs6 to disable the transparent pixel , the shape setting is in 0 feather setting yet the shape comes with transparent pixel . Is it possible to create vector shape as crisp as illustrator ?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI am interested in setting up a plugin that is able to read the greyscale values of a defined number of pixels throughout an image, average them, and then generate shapes based on the value output.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI wanna use to shapee tool or whatever- ractangle tool- Generally said I need to create some shape. But at photoshop is everything snap my new shape to pixels. Like in the backroground is some invisible pixel grids and everything is snaping to whole pixels. I dont want this. I Want to use whole space without automatic pixels adapting to my shapes. I want to be independent in creating my shapes without snaping to pixels grid.
And also want to ask you. If you would like create new guide lines it is non dependable on pixel grid. But after it when I want to snap my nex objects to it- it not possible. And when I tick in preferences/ general: ,,snap vector tool to pixel grid" everything become dependable to pixels and everything is snapping to pixels. I don t wanna this…
I work on CS3 and have often the problem for the logos the Companies send me in .jpg to convert for their design as a vector file.
With vector magic it works always good to smooth with one click the curves full of pixels into a pixel free curve with clear boundary.
I had a look into the old discussion on this forum and found few things in the discussion "raster image .gif". I would like to get an addon that would be a 1 time buying and cheaper as a complete new investment into a whole soft like vector magic.
Is there a trick to pasting a pixel-perfect vector image from Illustrator into Photoshop as a smart object, and not introduce a bunch of anti-aliasing that was not in the original file? My images are perfectly aligned with the pixel grid in Illustrator, and the pixel preview shows them correctly.
This page is useful for dealing with vector shape layers, but the techniques he talks about don't work for smart objects. Strangely, he says he doesn't have a problem with smart objects, but I do.
Here is an example of what I'm talking about: a simple 13x13 pixel image in Illustrator turns to crap in Photoshop when pasted as a smart object (I know an image as simple as this could be pasted as a shape layer, but the real images I'm working with are much more complex, and cannot be pasted as simple shape layers).
I'm using Photoshop CS4.
Is there a way to convert the pixel based phtoshop files to the vector based illustrator files?
View 2 Replies View Relatedthis is probally the most noob question ever but I can't get a 1 pixel brush, 3x3 is the smallest brush I can get
View 5 Replies View RelatedI am trying to take a jpg file of an image, and write each RGB pixel color's value into a 3 component integer vector corresponding to the RGB components of the color for that pixel. For each pixel in the jpg, I wish to write the corresponding 3 by 1 integer vector into a matrix after which I plan to do a SVD decomposition of the newly constructed matrix to do an image analysis.
Any plug-in that allows one to efficiently iterate through each pixel in a jpg, and convert the pixel data to a RGB integer vector, and say write to a file?
Specific Details: I am using gimp 2.6 as my image editor, and wish to collect all the RGB 3 by 1 integer vectors (where each 3 by 1 integer vector corresponds to RGB color of exactly one pixel in the jpg image) into a matrix of integer so that I can do a reduced SVD decomposition of that matrix to analyse the pixel data: I wish to compare two similar images by using the SVD decomposition of integer matrices corresponding to the two images saved as jpg files pic1.jpg and pic2.jpg.
I have a picture, I am looking to take one pixel of color and copy it nearby over another pixel. How do I do this? try to inform me about the exact brush and size I need to select as I cannot figure out the correct combo to do so.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI need to look at the pixel intensity of a gray scale image to write some code. I have used some trivial softwares like paintshop pro earlier where you can see the pixel intensity being displayed along with the co ordinates of the pixels as you slide your mouse pointer across. In Gimp 2.8 for windows, i can see the co ordinates but not the intensity. My image is a grayscale image.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have a 2013 Macbook Pro 15 with discrete graphics and plenty of RAM, so I cannot image the computer is to blame. I have 2.8.10. When using features like auto white balance it takes way too long to change the pixel colors. I have installed GIMP in parallels and it runs faster through the Windows application than it does directly on my Mac. Is this just the result of the mac build being not as refined? Is there a setting that I need to change? I have the Tile Cache on 8GB and number of processors on 8 (4 actual, 4 virtual).
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am trying to do some pixel art. what i want to do is take my concept art which is pretty good size and make a video game sprite over the top of it. So i would need to have a background image which is large and a foreground that is WAY SMALLER but lines up with it.
View 1 Replies View RelatedIs there a way to change the origin of the y-axis from the top to the bottom, with the positive being on top and negative on bottom?
Also, I notice that exact pixel coordinates are split down the center of the actual pixel. When I hover the mouse over a pixel, it will only show the correct coordinate of that pixel in the top left quadrant of that pixel. The attached picture represents a single pixel at (0,0). If I put the mouse over the red quadrant, I correctly get (0,0). If I put it over the Blue quadrants, I get (1,0) and (0,1). The Green displays as (1,1). This is rather inconvenient for me, as I'm working on pixel art, so I always have to make sure to mouse over the top left 1/4th of the pixel that I'm trying to find the coordinate of.
I'd like to accomplish:
Having a single color background with multiple thin vertical layers that will be equal distance apart, thus giving a striped look. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble positioning the layer exactly using pixel coordinates. I'm not even sure if that can be done.
I'm trying to create 1 pixel wide borders for some web buttons. I've tried to use the GIMP path tool to do this but I can't figure out how to get it looking right. See attached image.
1 - copied from a button I found on a web-page. This is what I want - single pixel horizontal and vertical lines with feathering on the curved bits.
2 - path that I used to generate the images on the right.
3 - 'Stroke Path' with 1px brush size & no antialiasing. Corners are not smooth.
4 - 'Stroke Path' with 1px brush size & anti-aliasing. Straight lines are too fuzzy as they are 2 pixel wide rather than 1.
Is there a way to do this with the path tool or any other way with the GIMP?
Due to that nature of Video, which I work in, pixels are shaped differently for televisions than they are for computers or print. Standard Deffinition is 720x480 pixels yet you can get the pixel aspect ratio in 4:3 or widescreen which is 16:9 yet it is still considered 720x480 pixels. Is there a way to compensate for this? I author DVDs for clients and would like to use GIMP to create menus for the DVDs. I can start a PSD in Adobe Encore CS4, save it as a PSD, open it in GIMP and work in more detail there yet when I save it from GIMP and open it back up in Encore, because of the pixel aspect ratio, the size of the image and menu is stuck at 4:3. Can I save 720x480 pixels in the 16:9 format or do I need to just change the pixels?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI am using Gimp 2.8.0 but only understand about 5% or less of it. (It is running on Win.7 Hm. Prm., Vsn 6.1, Sp-1.)
How can I define or adjust the pencil tool so it draws at the one pixel size in a new ".gif" work area. (That would be one pixel in the image to one pixel on the screen.) I found how to define the work area in pixels for a ".gif". The predefined pencil tool sizes (chosen by assorted dots) "went away" several versions of Gimp back as far as I know.
The object of this effort is to produce "TrainGifs" for use in other applications. Should you be interested just Google "TrainGifs" and you will be able to check out multiple site for this hobby.
I have spent hours trying to do this simple task in Gimp without luck. What I'm looking for is the border effect (without outer shadow) seen in the three embedded screenshots in this image: [URL]
In inkscape it's a matter of adding a square on top of the image with identical dimensions and making the stroke colour semitransparent and the fill colour completely transparent, but image quality suffers badly when exporting from svg to png or jpg again, and I'd prefer doing it in Gimp.
So, take image, say 100 by 100, add 1 pixel inner transparent border - how? I have seen this effect enough to suspect it's a filter option but haven't found anything in my filters.
I have some picture look like a line of graph, but it has only one-pixel line width (for an example in attach file) and it can't be seen when I put it in presentation slide. So I want to make line thicker, like 3-5 pixel width. How can I do this?
View 2 Replies View RelatedIn gimp, some things are confusing. like the shear/skew tool, isometrics/pixel grids, and selecting objects.
Is there a way to skew a circle for isometric pixel art (30 degrees)? Does gimp have a isometric/pixel grid? (there's a regular grid, but its not isometric)
when selecting an object, is there a way to select it without using float every time? Lastly, is there a way to constrain a line to the 3 most used isometric lines used in isometric pixel art? (shift works, but its hit or miss)
I'm trying to create a soccer field. I searched on google images for examples to learn from and I found this one really good one. The grass looks great and is just what I'm trying to do. [URL] .....
I loaded it into to gimp to have a closer look, and all the artist has done really has used lots of different greens, usually a different color on each pixel. How do you think this person went about creating the grass? Do you they colored each pixel individually then saw what they had done and adjusted it until they got it right. Which would probably take a really long time. Or do you think there is a quicker way?
I am currently searching the tools that I use in Adobe PS/AI in other products. I have recently downloaded GIMP as a possible substitution for Adobe PS/AI. But I have been searching the default (no plugin) tool box for anything that can do the Magic Wand Tools job. I just have not found it.
Magic Wand - select a pixel/color on the screen. Magic wand will then select all colors that correlate to your selection. I use the magic wand to kill backgrounds out of photos.
I have a 40 mb image file that needs to be split into 600x730 pixel pieces. Is there a way to automate this?
View 1 Replies View Related"Image > Print Size" really IS the command you are looking for.
The key is to pay attention to the units-of-measure shown on the Print Size dialogue box:- The "Width" and "Height" values under Print Size are displayed in real-world units (inches, mm, etc.), not image pixels.- The "Resolution" values are displayed in pixels-per-unit.- You cannot change your image's pixel dimensions (aka scale the image) from the Print Size dialogue. That's what the "Scale Image" command is for.Remember the relation between pixel and print sizes is:(print size) = (pixel size) / (print resolution)
When you change the image's print resolution, of course the real-world size (the "width" or "height" shown in the Print Size dialog) of your image will update to reflect the new print resolution -- that value is calculated from your image's actual pixel size and whatever resolution value you just entered. This is totally normal behavior -- in fact, it's expected. If you change an image's resolution from, say, 150 pixels/inch to 75 pixels/inch, this doubles the print size of your image but only the print size; the image's pixel size remains precisely the same as before. (You can confirm this by comparing "Image > Canvas Size..." before and after changing the resolution.)
And as others have stated, if you're using the image for Web viewing then its print resolution has absolutely zero effect on how it will appear onscreen (print resolution only affects, well, actual printing), in which case you'll want to use the "Scale Image" command to actually scale your image larger or smaller.
