Hello,

I'm wondering how I can center something within a selection. So I've got this:



I'd like to center the text "prepare wireframes" within the yellow box. So with the fuzzy select tool, I select the yellow area inside the box. Then I switch to the "prepare wireframes" text layer. You can see the layer border in the image above (which also happens to crop the selection). Then I select the alignment tool. Then I click on center horizontally. But nothing happens.

How can I center the text inside a selection?

I'm relatively new to both GIMP and image editing, so I don't know if this is due to my own inexperience or if I'm noticing something weird in GIMP (2.10.12, Windows 10).

Is the Pixelize filter supposed to apply the average color within and to each block subsection?  And if I expand the block size to cover the entire selection, that should act as a way to average the entire selection?  And should the average found via the histogram's mean RGB values match the average after the pixelization filter is used?

Either that doesn't always seem to be the case, or I'm misunderstanding something.

I noticed the issue while using GIMP for a retexturing project for the old game Team Fortress Classic where I'm basically pixelizing the textures and adding a grid to reduce detail and streamline the look (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OekLawHEfi8, early attempt before I streamlined it further).

Take this one example image: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vOT8MuE...sp=sharing

I convert its mode to RGB, then select the bottom 16 pixel row to pixelize, and whether I pixelize the entire row or just one 16x16 square, I get a different end result via pixelize than I get via the histogram's average, or via a plugin like ofn-average-fill found here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-to...s/scripts/  Before pixelizing, histogram tells me the mean RGB of the selection is 21.2/19.9/19.9, and after pixelizing the entire row as one block, the RGB is 27.5/27.8/28.2.

Please let me know if it's me misunderstanding how pixelize (or any other step in the  process) is supposed to work, or if it's a bug in the program.  Thanks.  =x

I worked with Photoshop for several years and use the "Save for web" function daily.
I start to become somewhat familair with Gimp but I have one big issue.

As far as I know, there is no (standard) function "save for web" in Gimp.
So, I do it step by step.

As an example I exported a image from Lightroom in PSD format and open it in Gimp.
It is a image without transparency.
I use Gimp 2.10

First I resize / scale the image to acceptable size like 800 px wide, like I do in Photoshop, with cubic interpolation (I use bicubic in PS)
Then I use the export function, change the extension to .png (every checkbox is empty, like interlacing, save background color).
I have selected 8bpc RGB, compression level 9 and hit Export.
The .png file that is created is almost 3 times bigger then when I use the "save for web" function in PS.

- Flatten image is not the solution, there is no transparency.
- I assume I use already maximum compression for png.
- The number of pixels width-heigt are exactly the same in PS as in Gimp.

What steps do I forget to have a file size comparable to PS?

Hi!
This is my first topic in this forum. I made this art with Gimp in version 2.10.12. Hope you like it! 

There are several features on 2.10 that are not working (recently downloaded). The main one is the clone tool has a O with a slash through it when I try to use it. Is it a bug?**************Never mind, I figured it out!!!******************

Is there an installer for the help manual for version 2.10.12?
I'm running under Windows 10 Pro 64 bit.

GEGL's c2g function in Gimp 2.10.12 performs very differently as compared to v2.8.  the outcome is much brighter, and the deep blacks are gone that were so helpful to simulate a film-based appearance.  i played with the settings for radius, samples and iterations but nothing comes close to the former appearance.  clicking the 'shadow' button didn't improve the result.  so, the current stage of c2g is pretty useless for me - unless i do something substantially wrong.

i didn't try yet the command line version for c2g in case that's an option with 2.10 - but i anyway never got that to behave properly in 2.8 either...

then, another problem (as reported earlier) is that c2g makes use of only 2 cores on my multi-core machine.  occasionally as i play with the 'split' function it may for a while run on all cores but then it resorts back to two cores.  why ?  but even then, i don't feel any difference in processing speed.  25Mpixels can take quite a while !

technicalities : 16bit rgb tiff files (converted from Leica DNG files), no color correction, Linux Slackware v15 -current, kernel 4.19.57, 16GB RAM, graphics card running at 4K, make is NVIDIA Corporation GK208B GeForce GT 720, using generic X drivers.

Absolute nube here, 
     When I try to export a file to .JPG Windows 10 shows the file as a "Gimp 2.10.12" file, and will not allow me to show it as a .JPG file. any way to change this?

I've been using GIMP for a long time and have some familiarity using BIMP but I recently came across something I need to automate that it can't without scripting or a plugin.  I would like to start with an image with a white background and stack multiple PNG images on top of each other.  For what I need, it will just be the same image stacked on top of itself a variable number of times.  Basically like this:

----
Start with a new, square dimension image.  
Take a PNG file with a transparent background
Put the first image near the top left corner
Then place another copy a few pixels down and to the right (variable pixels and number of times).
----

Something tells me this can be done with a script or plugin.  I do have some programming experience and I'm learning Python now, but if a method, plugin, or script exists I would be able to use I would appreciate being steered in the right direction.  Any help you can give me would be greatly appreciated!

Sorry for hijacking this thread.

Plan to get a Wacom tablet. Appreciate your recommendation on the model you find good for the job. Thanks.