After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 165023 - non-grey transparency indicator
non-grey transparency indicator
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: GIMP
Classification: Other
Component: General
2.2.x
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: GIMP Bugs
GIMP Bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-01-23 21:34 UTC by Albert Cahalan
Modified: 2008-01-15 12:46 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
reasonable use case (129.70 KB, image/png)
2005-01-24 15:51 UTC, Albert Cahalan
Details
reasonable use case, original JPEG (121.05 KB, image/jpeg)
2005-01-24 16:10 UTC, Albert Cahalan
Details

Description Albert Cahalan 2005-01-23 21:34:25 UTC
This is referring to the checkerboard pattern that acts as
the ultimate background in transparent and smei-transparent
regions of an image. Normally, light and dark grey are used.

I find green (#00ff00) and magenta (#ff00ff) to be better.
Please add this to the choices.

Also, this would make a nice default. Try it; you'll like it.
Comment 1 Sven Neumann 2005-01-24 15:19:05 UTC
It would be rather difficult to implement this. For efficiency, the display is
scaled and composited on the checkerboard pattern in one go. This code uses a
LUT that relies on the grayscale property of the background. Of course this
could be changed, but it would be a lot of work and it would certainly slow
things down.

Unless a reasonable use case is added here, this request should be closed WONTFIX.
Comment 2 Albert Cahalan 2005-01-24 15:51:28 UTC
Created attachment 36456 [details]
reasonable use case

The fireman is uneven grey. His background is too.
The grey checkerboard pattern is very poor for working
with him. Bright green works pretty well, as does magenta.
Comment 3 Albert Cahalan 2005-01-24 15:56:59 UTC
You can't just use 3 LUTs?

Anyway, I attached a reasonable use case image for you.
The grey checkerboard pattern is useless for editing the
alpha channel. Look at the folds of silvery cloth along
the fireman's legs. The original background consisted of
grey rocks. Carving the fireman out of his background
was hopeless with the grey checkerboard pattern.

Comment 4 Albert Cahalan 2005-01-24 16:10:05 UTC
Created attachment 36461 [details]
reasonable use case, original JPEG

This is the original fireman image.
It's a public domain photo from the US Air Force.
Comment 5 Raphaël Quinet 2005-01-24 16:21:23 UTC
I agree that the default gray pattern is not optimal for working with images
that contain a lot of gray.  I usually solve that problem by creating a new
background layer behind the one that I am editing and I fill that layer with
bright red or green.  It would be nice to have a way to customize the colors
of the checkerboard pattern, but I am not sure that it is worth the effort,
considering that some workarounds are available.
Comment 6 Albert Cahalan 2005-01-24 16:46:17 UTC
I of course used the work-around suggested in comment #5.

This eats lots of memory. This could perhaps be solved via
some sort of pattern-fill layer. I found my system swapping
like mad when I added green and magenta layers.

There's also the problem of file saving. You have to get
rid of the layers when you wish to save.

All in all, the work-around is painful. It's just that,
a work-around.
Comment 7 Albert Cahalan 2005-01-24 17:05:07 UTC
I should add that I now use green (and often magenta too) for
all images that I work with. The bright colors are simply better,
even with images that aren't mostly grey.

So this isn't just some obscure case for pictures like the
fireman image. I've used the green+magenta layers for trees,
a football, a soccerball, a fire, and so on. The only recent
image that I used the grey checkerboard for was a candle, and
that's only because setting up the green+magenta was too much
work for a quick job.

Comment 8 Sven Neumann 2005-01-24 19:58:19 UTC
Albert, we know that you are a weird guy. You are still just one out of many
GIMP users and definitely one of the most annoying ones.
Comment 9 weskaggs 2005-02-25 19:44:24 UTC
Closing as WONTFIX based on comments and the existence of a workaround.  If
anybody has a patch to contribute that accomplishes what is requested here, feel
free to reopen.
Comment 10 Albert Cahalan 2005-02-25 20:03:17 UTC
The comments regarding efficiency appear to be incorrect.
If they were correct, then compositing extra layers would
be a problem --> better get rid of the layers feature???
Comment 11 Michael Schumacher 2005-02-25 21:03:10 UTC
You seem to know the code well enough to provide a patch then? :)