+- Gimp-Forum.net (https://www.gimp-forum.net)
+-- Forum: GIMP (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Forum-GIMP)
+--- Forum: Extending the GIMP (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Forum-Extending-the-GIMP)
+--- Thread: ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem (/Thread-ofn-stroke-visible-paths-problem)
ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem - Espermaschine - 06-22-2018
Im trying to replicate this effect with ofnuts' script.
My paths go from biggest on top, to smallest at the bottom.
I've got a gradient set up, yellow is at the beginning, going to red, to blue, to white at the end.
When i execute the script, with parameters:
From Gradient, Stroke and Multiple Layers, i get a bunch of single colour filled layers.
Yellow is at the bottom and not on the top....
When i execute the script with parameters:
From Gradient, Stroke and Single Layer, i get everything merged as expected, but the colours are again with yellow at the bottom.
Reversing the gradient doesnt change that.
So i edited the gradient and flipped it. Now it strokes the paths in the expected way, but i need multiple layers and that is still broken.
I dont understand why the script strokes the paths from bottom to top and why it doesnt accept reversing the gradient in the Tool Options (btw, this is all in Gimp 2.8).
It seems it strokes the paths in the order of the pathname (which has got numbers), but thats not how a 3D effect works.
RE: ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem - rich2005 - 06-22-2018
I can understand stroking the paths from bottom to top, hiding unwanted bits as it does so.
But yes the gradient is used as-it-is, reversing in the gradient dialogue has no effect.
Other than making a reversed gradient, one way is to reverse the layer order Layer -> Stack -> Reverse Layer Order
This one: https://i.imgur.com/bJYA0sg.jpg Generated intermediate paths top to bottom, stroked with a yellow to blue gradient. Yellow ended up on bottom, reversed the layer order.
RE: ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem - Espermaschine - 06-22-2018
I got it now, but there is definiteley a bug.
Tried several times and i got whole layers filled with colour, not just the inside of the paths as expected.
Closed Gimp, went to the supermarket, came back and now stroking the path on multiple layers worked.
![[Image: isY1gju.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/isY1gju.jpg)
RE: ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem - Ofnuts - 06-22-2018
- Menu entry says "Stroke or fill visible paths" so the script can fill the paths. Unless I get more tangible clues I'll ascribe this to "user error".
- Yes, the paths are stroked/filled from bottom to top in the stack, this is a conscious decision.
- The script doesn't check the "Reversed" status of the gradient in the Blend tool options because.... there is no API for this in 2.8 (it's new in 2.10). Not difficult to add the option in the dialog (which IMHO will be more user-friendly than requiring the user to select the Blend tool to tweak its options).
- While I'm at it, once you can reverse the gradient, is reversing the path processing order still useful (read: is the usefulness greater than the clutter of the dialog and the potential errors this allows)?
- Would it be useful to have two separate menu entries for stroke and fill?
- "Now it strokes the paths in the expected way, but i need multiple layers and that is still broken.". Uh?
- The script is still the more anonymous "stroke-visible-paths"
RE: ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem - Ofnuts - 06-22-2018
(06-22-2018, 07:34 PM)Espermaschine Wrote: I got it now, but there is definiteley a bug.
Tried several times and i got whole layers filled with colour, not just the inside of the paths as expected.
Closed Gimp, went to the supermarket, came back and now stroking the path on multiple layers worked.
Nice but 1) missing the apostrophe, and 2) that would be "present" (unless you just mispelled "show their raised fingers to Adobe puppets"
) What font is that?
RE: ofn-stroke-visible-paths problem - Espermaschine - 06-22-2018
(06-22-2018, 08:04 PM)Ofnuts Wrote: Nice but 1) missing the apostrophe, and 2) that would be "present" (unless you just mispelled "show their raised fingers to Adobe puppets"
01) The fonts native apostrophe looked horrible, so i saved myself from the extra work. Also: last time i checked, "excited" was spelled differently, so hereby i reclaim my artistic freedom.
02) Lets assume ofnuts & esper is some sort of group or brand
P.S: my hatred of Adobe is not that strong, after all their followers still provide the most interesting effects for me to try.
This forum also teached me, that a lot of people dont deserve powerful open source software.
Quote:What font is that?
https://www.dafont.com/de/die-nasty.font
I may be wrong, but i think this font is a recreation of a font used by the rockgroup KISS on their Hotter than hell album.
(06-22-2018, 08:01 PM)Ofnuts Wrote: [*]"Now it strokes the paths in the expected way, but i need multiple layers and that is still broken.". Uh ?
Yes, as i said, the first round i tried to get this to work, your script would fill layers with colours.
So i ended with a stack of layers, each filled completely with a colour from the gradient.
Meanwhile, the merged option worked as expected. But thats not what i needed.
I dont think this was a user error.
(06-22-2018, 08:01 PM)Ofnuts Wrote:
- Yes, the paths are stroked/filled from bottom to top in the stack, this is a conscious decision.
Well what is the conscious decision behind it ??
The 3D effect goes from top to bottom. Front to back.
Why would you make a new gradient that is the other way around ?
Or is it because the path inbetweener script works from bottom to top ?
If thats the case, it would make a lot more sense to call them top and bottom paths, instead of 'End Path' and 'Begin Path'.
IMO, the merge option makes the least sense.
The script should always produce multiple layers, ideally in a layer group.
Then, i can merge the layer group with one mouseclick, should i need it.