12-23-2019, 11:12 AM (This post was last modified: 12-23-2019, 11:14 AM by rich2005.
Edit Reason: typo
)
Just wondering why it has become so complicated.
My thoughts on some procedures as a demo video https://youtu.be/9uBDgWuWV0I long one for me 7 minutes but it is start to finish with some hints. A set of png's 000.png to 359.png as one of those previous requests.
Now off for some belated Christmas shopping because the damn Metro has been on strike
12-23-2019, 01:55 PM (This post was last modified: 12-23-2019, 02:24 PM by AmazingGimp.)
(12-23-2019, 08:55 AM)Ofnuts Wrote:
(12-23-2019, 05:54 AM)AmazingGimp Wrote:
(12-17-2019, 11:33 PM)Ofnuts Wrote:
Make that new layer "RING" invisible, copy/merge it to the other layers (ofn-interleave-layers)
When i open Ofnuts xcf file, this last step where it says "Make that new layer invisible".
I made ring layer invisible, then ran the 'ofn-interleave-layers'. It created a new image file. That exported all the visible layers to the other page, except the grey ring layer that has the 20px circle.
I tried exporting it to gif, all i get is the tick marker animating without the grey background.
Then, I tried making the RING layer visible, and ran the 'ofn-interleave-layers', I get the tick marker animating without the grey background, and the last frame is the grey background by itself.
I think i am missing is the copy/merge to the other layers. I am not sure what he meant by that. Does he meant I have to duplicate the grey ring layers 12 times (since I have 12 blue markets), and then merge each of these marker with the grey ring?
Thanks for patience everyone.
In single-layer modes, Interleave-layer takes a layer (from anywhere, the current image or another), and copy/merges it with the visible layers of the current image.
If the layer is from another image (not your case) it can be visible or not in its carrier image
If the layer is from the same image, it must be not visible, otherwise in the output there will be a frame with that layer merged over itself (which is what you found out when you made the ring layer visible).
It you don't get the ring layer in the output, it is possible that you didn't specify the ring layer as the layer to merge (Layer: parameter in the dialog). Otherwise please attach your XCF here.
Ofnuts, I am using your Spinner.xcf actually.
And, i got it at last. I guess the merge is during the interleave-layer option --> Interleave single layer under stack (sprite). That's where i get to specify the layer to merge to.
(12-23-2019, 01:29 PM)Ofnuts Wrote: Just replaced the old (2014) dial-marks script with a new version (ofn-dial-marks) that has two more options:
Direction to create the marks in clockwise ot counter-clockwise order
Generated path(s) to make it generate a single path or a path for each mark.
(12-23-2019, 11:12 AM)rich2005 Wrote: Just wondering why it has become so complicated.
My thoughts on some procedures as a demo video https://youtu.be/9uBDgWuWV0I long one for me 7 minutes but it is start to finish with some hints. A set of png's 000.png to 359.png as one of those previous requests.
Now off for some belated Christmas shopping because the damn Metro has been on strike
Great video! Pardon for my slowness in picking up.
Both your method and ofNuts method is great as well. I am going to try out both to learn.
My last 2019 resolution before the New Year !!!
Merry Xmas!
12-23-2019, 02:23 PM (This post was last modified: 12-23-2019, 02:36 PM by Ofnuts.)
(12-23-2019, 01:55 PM)AmazingGimp Wrote: Ofnuts, I am using your Spinner.xcf actually. Where is this option to specify the ring layer as the layer to merge? During the interleave process?
Yes, it's in the interleave process, but you have to pick the right option. The dialog you show is for the "Stack of layers over current layers"(*), while the option you should use is "Single layer under stack":
(*) In that mode you would merge several input layers, so you don't specify a single layer but an image that contains the layers.
12-23-2019, 02:40 PM (This post was last modified: 12-23-2019, 02:42 PM by AmazingGimp.)
(12-23-2019, 02:23 PM)Ofnuts Wrote:
(12-23-2019, 01:55 PM)AmazingGimp Wrote: Ofnuts, I am using your Spinner.xcf actually. Where is this option to specify the ring layer as the layer to merge? During the interleave process?
Yes, it's in the interleave process, but you have to pick the right option. The dialog you show is for the "Stack of layers over current layers"(*), while the option you should use is "Single layer under stack":
(*) In that mode you would merge several input layers, so you don't specify a single layer but an image that contains the layers.
I ran the animation, and i noticed, there are some blue left over after it runs through the images.
Do i just have to make the grey area slightly larger? (fixed it with 21px instead)
(12-23-2019, 01:55 PM)AmazingGimp Wrote: Ofnuts, I am using your Spinner.xcf actually. Where is this option to specify the ring layer as the layer to merge? During the interleave process?
Yes, it's in the interleave process, but you have to pick the right option. The dialog you show is for the "Stack of layers over current layers"(*), while the option you should use is "Single layer under stack":
(*) In that mode you would merge several input layers, so you don't specify a single layer but an image that contains the layers.
I ran the animation, and i noticed, there are some blue left over after it runs through the images.
Do i just have to make the grey area slightly larger? (fixed it with 21px instead)
I suspect this is because your animation is in combine mode instead of being in replace mode. No need to widen the ring.
12-26-2019, 03:02 PM (This post was last modified: 12-26-2019, 05:02 PM by AmazingGimp.)
OfNuts,
It is interesting, when I play the animation, it plays from the last layer [1] going in reverse which will show the graphic as going CW.
But, when i tried to use the export all layers, it export the first layer as 000, second as 001. And, if i run the png file from 000 to 036, i get CCW direction instead.
It looks like the export all layers, export the first layer as the first, and last layer as last regardless what the layer last naming convention is [0], [1], [2]...
Is there anyway, where i can sort my layers where [0] as first layer, [1] as second layer before I export all?
Is there anyway to make the graphic vector based?
Here is a comparison with the picture on the left that i have which is like vector, and the right which is generated with gimp and it looks jagged when i scale the picture equally.
12-26-2019, 07:12 PM (This post was last modified: 12-26-2019, 07:16 PM by Ofnuts.)
The scripts are coherent between themselves, to make an animation in Gimp where the bottom layer is the first to play. My mirror-layers script will copy in reverse order your layers, to make the animation run backwards (so that initial layers plus copied layers make a whole cycle of "swing"), so you can use that and discard the extra layers.
The jagged edges are not due to Gimp but to the GIF format. Smooth edges are obtained with semi-transparent pixels but GIF only does dully opaque or fully transparent pixels. So the image becomes jagged when you export. If your image is color-indexed in Gimp, then transparency works like in a GIF and the edges are jagged from the start. The WebP format I mentioned earlier has no such limitation.
Another explanation is that unlike vectors, bitmaps are not easily scalable. With CGI such as this depending on interpolation algorithm you either get blurry edges (Linear/Cubic/NoHalo/LowHalo) or jagged edge (None). When you zoom in (not exactly the same thing as scaling) Gimp doesn't interpolate.
AFAIK there is no widely supported animated vector format. It could be possible to make a vector animation with SVG files and some JavaScript but this could slow down the client workstation.
Is there anyway to export it in a high format picture (png?) and allow scalling?
Or would it be better if i built the image at larger pixels, and then scale it down from there. would that help the jagged?
Downscaling an image is usually better than upscaling it, but when dealing with CGI (smooth linear edges) even downscaled image will appear a bit blurry. So it"s best to plan in advance and produce the image at exactly the right size. A nd check your interpolation algorithm when using the scale tools (and all transform tools). Use NoHalo until you know better.
