On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 08:21:32AM -0400, Ell via gimp-developer-list wrote: > On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 00:38:17 +0100 > Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > TL;DR - using masks in a 2.8 scheme script works as intended to > > extract parts of an image, but after converting it for 2.9 it does > > much less. > > The most likely reason for the different results, is that in 2.9 masks > use the pixels' linearized intensity as the alpha value, while in 2.8 > they use the gamma-corrected intensity. The linearized intensity > values are generally lower than the gamma-corrected ones, so the > resulting mask values, after pasting a desaturated image into the mask, > are lower in 2.9 than they would be in 2.8, resulting in a subtler > effect. Note that these sorts of interactions is something we're still > working on. > Thanks for the detailed reply. I'll have to get back on the 2.9 machine at some point to work through the options. Meanwhile, I've saved a full copy of your mail in my notes. Cheers. ĸen -- I live in a city. I know sparrows from starlings. After that everything is a duck as far as I'm concerned. -- Monstrous Regiment _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
