xxx$ md5sum meetthegimp108.mp4

the result should be:

215823284c106cfb79925cda80ba0553 meetthegimp108.mp4

If it is, the download is complete and the file not corrupted. Then the error is in your system. If you get a different result, the download is at fault, Then try:

xxx$ wget http://meetthegimp.org/torrents/meetthegimp108.mp4

Most screens have square pixels, equal in width and height. This should be true for all computer monitors. If you make an image with a square crop it will be a square here too, even when I use a wide screen monitor.

But some displays use rectangular pixels – and for them you have to distort the image. These displays are used in special devices (I had a MP3 player with such a display) and when you make an image for these things you need these settings. So it’s very special and perhaps of not much use for most of us.

I have no experience with display devices other than my monitor, which has a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels. If I create an image in Gimp that looks good on this monitor and I display it on a device with a different aspect ratio, I guess the image will appear distorted. Is this the motivation? That is, do I use this technique to change the pixel size in my image so that it renders properly on the new display?

I’m still catching up by watching all the episodes, and I hope to catch up with everyone soon!

Rolf, that was one of the best shows in the last months! You’ve shown so many important steps. Maybe one thing to say: the stroke path tool has not only the solid line setting as you did several times in this video. It can also apply the current brush to the path and emulate the brush dynamics. So if you set hardness, opacity and size to random, choose a fancy brush and apply it to your path you will get a nice border e.g. You can find a nice example at http://www.gedankenquirl.de/gallery/index.php?twg_album=Blog%2F768___080702+Kongsberg+Jazzfestival&twg_show=DSCF0048.JPG

So even though some might not consider it the ideal tool for vector-style illustration, here’s an example in GIMP:

WIP: http://www.friendlyskies.net/currentdesktop.png
WIP in a composition: http://www.flickr.com/photos/porkfriedrice/2805210344/

…anyway, that’s 100% Gnu Image Manipulation

There used to be a plugin that I used there to do the background sky. It would render clouds and the sun, and was very nice…sadly I don’t have it around anymore.

I don’t know how much people from China are here, and the Chinese feed is not working.

You also know the Great Firewall? ohhh~ it is one reason why i chose to come to Australia…

By the way, great work buddy~ or maybe someday you will teach us some simple German word in the tutorial as well :p

The algebraic analysis of operations is a good idea. One should think about it when writing a script or a tutorial for a new method. 16 Bit will reduce the influence of rounding errors – and GEGL will make it possible to recalculate a stack of operations. We have to wait.

When the Orton effect was first mentioned in the forum I did some similar experiments. But after a while I was wondering what I was doing. It was not so much different from other technics with no name but used every day when working with gimp or other programs. The main point of the Orton effect seems to be that Mr. Orton invented the layers long before they were a standard feature of every software for photo manipulation.

There are always a lot of different ways to get to similar results. When you mentioned Mathematica I got the idea may be someone could come up with a algorithm which could help to simplify the stack of operations we apply to a picture. This could be done by evaluating algebraically the result of the operations and decompose the result back to available operations. This could reduce errors from excessive rounding.

Math would be useful only when you decided to do some complicated calculations within your plugin using python.

The Hasselblad and full frame were meant to be alternative frames, not to used together. Although this can be handled as you like, of course…

Just a curiosity.
~jim

I changed the value part of the foreground colours and was in colour mode. So no change visible.

The first time I noticed it, you were flipping between displays which were subtle in their differences, and I
thought there really was a problem, but finally realized the overlay was essentially everywhere.

~jim