(Not sure if this is the right place for this) but I’ve been seeing this videos of people that use an app (not sure which ones they use) and they take one image and use an outline of another to move and warp one photo to fit the other. It’s almost like the smudge tool except nothings smeared or blurred it’s only warped, I’m not sure how I could replicate this with gimp but I was wondering if anybody knew any tools/settings that could do this (I’ve been looking for a while) any infos appreciated

Sup   . First post yet. I'm a newcomer, and I need help for a specific task: make a race car livery for a game.
I'm not english native, so expect some mispells and a software in French.

So here's the deal: I extracted a net from the game files:
 
This net contains 2 layers (calques):
-Texture

-UV

UV layer is the outline of the model and Texture, welp, texture. What i'm  trying to do here is to use the UV layer to paint the car, but I don't want those grey outlines on the model. Here is what it looks like:

 So I guess I need to add a new layer (Livery) and try to match it with UV, then erase the UV layer after I painted the whole thing.
Any ideas?

Specs: GIMP 2.10.24
Windows 7X32

Hi, I have plugins at

C:\Program Files\GIMP 2\share\gimp\2.0\plug-ins

But none of them appears inside GIMP in Windows 10. I copied the plugins from Ubuntu What to do now ?

Hi, I need to adjust the green patch inside the white stroke. But not sure how to select all those green fills at the same time. Any help will be great.

I figured out how to change the default unit of measurment from px to cm for a new image, but how do I do the same for an image I've copied from the net and pasted into gimp as new image (Ctrl, Shft + V)? When I go to resize for this, it's still in px?

Hello everyone, some time ago I made an image with an audio spectrum effect, and my problem is that I can't remember what kind of filter I used. I want to know if you can help me to achieve the same effect, what I remember when I make the image was that the filter I used can fragment the image in a grid and the distance between every "cube", as a result of the grid, was configurable so I modify some values to get the effect I desire. To clarify, I just make some big lines with green color in the layer that I applied the audio spectrum effect. Here is the image I made:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1phudqFx...dGVLA/view

Hi Everyone,
I want to apply mosaic filter to a set of images stored in my directory new_images.
I couldn't find any script for this from the gimp documentation pages.
Is there any script available for achieving this ?

Any help will be appreciated.?

Win10
Gimp 2.10.21 Samj's portable
**************//***************

It would be a bug what happens to the image in the second case described below?

The original image used was this  , but it could be any other.

The procedure is simple:
01- Selected using the Fuzzy Select Tool (Threshold 15) the red color in the pink area marked at (01).  

02- Having this layer an alpha channel, after the selection made in the previous step (01), Colors-color to alpha, selected the red color to make the transparency, ok. The result is as expected.

03- The layer does not have an alpha channel, repeating the previous step in (02); the result is that transparency is applied not only to the selected area, but to the entire area outside the square that contains the initial selection.

I know that all you need to do is apply an alpha channel to the layer before applying Color To Alpha that there's nothing to worry about.

But is this normal? Or was it a bug?



Is there something wrong that isn't right!?

Just a couple questions that I can't seem to find the answer for online, so I figured I would ask here.

Online, it says that editing a photo with 8-bit precision is easier on a computer's RAM, and reduces file size. I have no trouble with RAM usage, and I shoot a lot of my photos in 16-bit RAW format, so I edit photos with that. However, I'm VERY interested in the reduced file size.

It seems to me that if I edit a photo in 16-bit and then convert it to 8-bit precision after I'm done, it still makes it may smaller in size...and flipping between 16-bit and 8-bit via the history tab, I can't see an actual difference. Does anyone know what actually happens to the photo if I switch to the 8-bit precision after I'm done editing? And what's the difference between just using 8-bit precision and using indexed colors, since I can see a VERY visible difference if I index the colors as well.

I'd really like to know how much information I'm losing if I switch to 8-bit precision, without indexing, after I'm already done editing the original 16-bit photo.

Thanks!

Edit: Looking at the colorcube analysis, both the original 16-bit and converted 8-bit PNGs have the same amount of unique colors. Obviously, the indexed version only has 256. Does this mean that if I don't index, no actual visible information is lost by converting it to 8-bit?