5 Dec
2007
5 Dec
'07
8:16 a.m.
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to be
white, not black.
I've wasted the last half-hour reading out-of-date instructions and
trying unworkable solutions. I'm giving up on the Gimp and I figure
there must be an easier way to do what I want, so once again I turn to
the masters.
What would you use to do this ?
Best,
dp
5 Dec
5 Dec
8:21 a.m.
On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 07:16 -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to be
white, not black.
I've wasted the last half-hour reading out-of-date instructions and
trying unworkable solutions. I'm giving up on the Gimp and I figure
there must be an easier way to do what I want, so once again I turn to
the masters.
What would you use to do this ?
gimp tool. change the colors *before* you start adding the text. if
you're still on the initial black/white choice, press the "toggle" icon
next to the color buttons to flip then. ta-da!
8:53 a.m.
Hi Dave,
Am Mittwoch, den 05.12.2007, 07:16 -0500 schrieb Dave Phillips:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to be
white, not black.
The text is rendered using the current foreground colour. Foreground and
background colours, which are black and white by default, are shown in
the two overlaid rectangles beneath the tool box. If you want the text
to be white, just click the small rectangular arrow which swaps current
background and foreground colour.
HTH
Jan
8:54 a.m.
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Dave Phillips:
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I
want that text to be
white, not black.
<snip>
What would you use to do this ?
Gimp!
Either select the right color before you start creating the text.
Or edit the text again and change the colors while editing.
Or make the text its own layer and fill the whole layer with the color you
want.
Or...
You could also try to do it on the commandline with "convert", but I think
Gimp is _much_ easier to use.
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask your
administrator to do so...
6:08 p.m.
Arnold Krille wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Dave Phillips:
I prefer adding text to images using Inkscape. Vector-based text comes
out much better than bitmap based text, at least to me.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it.
I want that text to be
white, not black.
<snip>
What would you use to do this ?
Gimp!
Either select the right color before you start creating the text.
Or edit the text again and change the colors while editing.
Or make the text its own layer and fill the whole layer with the color you
want.
Or...
You could also try to do it on the commandline with "convert", but I think
Gimp is _much_ easier to use.
6 Dec
6 Dec
1:18 p.m.
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb david:
Arnold Krille wrote:
After saving to a pixel-based format (and I believe that dave means
pixel-based when he talks about images) that advantage becomes nill. And gimp
afaik uses the same font-engine as inkscape to render text. And yes, inkscape
renders text! To screen and to the exported pixmap/image...
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask your
administrator to do so...
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Dave
Phillips:
I prefer adding text to images using Inkscape.
Vector-based text comes
out much better than bitmap based text, at least to me. I have an image. I want to add simple text to it.
I want that text to be
white, not black.
What would you use to do this ?
Gimp!
Either select the right color before you start creating the text.
Or edit the text again and change the colors while editing.
Or make the text its own layer and fill the whole layer with the color
you want.
Or...
You could also try to do it on the commandline with "convert", but I
think Gimp is _much_ easier to use. 
2:22 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Arnold Krille wrote:
After saving to a pixel-based format (and I believe
that dave means
pixel-based when he talks about images) that advantage becomes nill. And gimp
afaik uses the same font-engine as inkscape to render text. And yes, inkscape
renders text! To screen and to the exported pixmap/image...
True. But Inkscape is a much simpler program. It does less, so it's not as
confusing as the Gimp. If I had mentioned Inkscape that's what I would have
meant, if I ever spoke in the subjunctive mood, which I would never do.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHWD4HTi5xeapaTM0RAvt7AJ4n/yOvFvFi/j6FvpcI6N+6+HVhcACfQw+q
ip7PyUc5003WA6qqe8/DAZw=
=BagJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2:47 p.m.
Bill White escribe:
True. But Inkscape is a much simpler program. It
does less, so it's not as
confusing as the Gimp. If I had mentioned Inkscape that's what I would have
meant, if I ever spoke in the subjunctive mood, which I would never do.
I can't agree. Inkscape is simply designed for a completely different
task. Both Inkscape and the GIMP kick asses, each one in what it's
designed for.
Cordially, Ismael
--
Ismael Valladolid Torres GnuPG key: DE721AF4
Jabber: ivalladt(a)gmail.com
http://usuarios.lycos.es/ivalladt/ Skype: ivalladt
7 Dec
7 Dec
2:47 a.m.
Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote:
Bill White escribe:
Inkscape is not yet competitive with the proprietary illustration
software, or even semi-proprietary apps like Xara for Linux. GIMP is
closer to being competitive with the commercial apps, but it is sure is
confusing to use!
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
True. But Inkscape is a much simpler program.
It does less, so it's not as
confusing as the Gimp. If I had mentioned Inkscape that's what I would have
meant, if I ever spoke in the subjunctive mood, which I would never do.
I can't agree. Inkscape is simply designed for a completely different
task. Both Inkscape and the GIMP kick asses, each one in what it's
designed for. 
3:04 a.m.
On Friday 07 December 2007 01:47, david wrote:
software, or even semi-proprietary apps like Xara for
Linux. GIMP
is closer to being competitive with the commercial apps, but it is
sure is confusing to use!
Luckily for Gimp, so is Photoshop.... but since Photoshop has such an
enormous user base and no one ships GimpShop with their major Linux
distro, I really think Gimp could still use a much more intuitive
interface.
I mean, after I spend a couple weeks setting up my keyboard shortcuts
and stuff, I'm a whiz with Gimp 2.2. Someone using it every day
would be much more so.
But you know, I'd still be a whiz after a couple weeks if Gimp had an
(optional, because of the ABM crowd) MDI interface, better menu and
tool layout, and more intuitive docking of toolboxes and whatnot, and
people who use it less often or for the first time wouldn't have as
many problems of the sort you've had.
User-friendly and newbie-friendly needn't be mutually exclusive; just
look at Firefox.
Rob
3:15 a.m.
Rob wrote:
On Friday 07 December 2007 01:47, david wrote:
I agree. The Adobe standard UI is one confusing and cluttered lump.
software, or even semi-proprietary apps like Xara
for Linux. GIMP
is closer to being competitive with the commercial apps, but it is
sure is confusing to use!
Luckily for Gimp, so is Photoshop.... but since Photoshop has such an
enormous user base and no one ships GimpShop with their major Linux
distro, I really think Gimp could still use a much more intuitive
interface.
It sure could. I consider the UI of the Targa TIPS graphics application
from 19 years ago just about perfect, and very intuitive. ;-)
I mean, after I spend a couple weeks setting up my
keyboard shortcuts
and stuff, I'm a whiz with Gimp 2.2. Someone using it every day
would be much more so.
I use it everyday, but not for much.
But you know, I'd still be a whiz after a couple
weeks if Gimp had an
(optional, because of the ABM crowd) MDI interface, better menu and
tool layout, and more intuitive docking of toolboxes and whatnot, and
people who use it less often or for the first time wouldn't have as
many problems of the sort you've had.
User-friendly and newbie-friendly needn't be mutually exclusive; just
look at Firefox.
I agree.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
6 Dec
6 Dec
11:05 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 13:23 -0500, Bill White wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Arnold Krille wrote:
If you want something that is truly simple you can't go past
kolourpaint. And the colour can be changed easily for text even after
the text is written simply by selecting the text and clicking on the
colour you desire at the bottom of the page. Useful for only the most
basic tasks but idiot-proof.
Shelagh
After saving to a pixel-based format (and I
believe that dave means
pixel-based when he talks about images) that advantage becomes nill. And gimp
afaik uses the same font-engine as inkscape to render text. And yes, inkscape
renders text! To screen and to the exported pixmap/image...
True. But Inkscape is a much simpler program. It does less, so it's not as
confusing as the Gimp. If I had mentioned Inkscape that's what I would have
meant, if I ever spoke in the subjunctive mood, which I would never do.
-----BEGIN PGP
SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHWD4HTi5xeapaTM0RAvt7AJ4n/yOvFvFi/j6FvpcI6N+6+HVhcACfQw+q
ip7PyUc5003WA6qqe8/DAZw=
=BagJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
3:13 p.m.
Arnold Krille wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb david:
I agree, the final text is rendered as a bitmap. But in Inkscape, that
isn't done until you export the image. So in the meantime, you can
resize the text and do other stuff with it without losing any quality.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Arnold Krille wrote:
After saving to a pixel-based format (and I believe that dave means
pixel-based when he talks about images) that advantage becomes nill. And gimp
afaik uses the same font-engine as inkscape to render text. And yes, inkscape
renders text! To screen and to the exported pixmap/image... Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Dave
Phillips:
I prefer adding text to images using Inkscape.
Vector-based text comes
out much better than bitmap based text, at least to me. I have an image. I want to add simple text to it.
I want that text to be
white, not black.
What would you use to do this ?
Gimp!
Either select the right color before you start creating the text.
Or edit the text again and change the colors while editing.
Or make the text its own layer and fill the whole layer with the color
you want.
Or...
You could also try to do it on the commandline with "convert", but I
think Gimp is _much_ easier to use.
4:02 p.m.
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2007 schrieb david:
Arnold Krille wrote:
Same for gimp. :-) Since some versions text is floated in a way that you can
edit it later on which means that it is not really rendered unless you do
something with it that breaks it...
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask your
administrator to do so...
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb david:
I agree, the
final text is rendered as a bitmap. But in Inkscape, that
isn't done until you export the image. So in the meantime, you can
resize the text and do other stuff with it without losing any quality. Arnold Krille wrote:
After saving to a
pixel-based format (and I believe that dave means
pixel-based when he talks about images) that advantage becomes nill. And
gimp afaik uses the same font-engine as inkscape to render text. And yes,
inkscape renders text! To screen and to the exported pixmap/image... Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Dave
Phillips:
> I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to
> be white, not black.
> What would you use to do this ?
Gimp!
Either select the right color before you start creating the text.
Or edit the text again and change the colors while editing.
Or make the text its own layer and fill the whole layer with the color
you want.
Or...
You could also try to do it on the commandline with "convert", but I
think Gimp is _much_ easier to use.
I prefer adding text to images using Inkscape.
Vector-based text comes
out much better than bitmap based text, at least to me.
5:33 p.m.
Arnold Krille escribe:
Same for gimp. :-) Since some versions text is floated
in a way that you can
edit it later on which means that it is not really rendered unless you do
something with it that breaks it...
The GIMP works using layers. Until you flatten layers, you can modify
the entered text without losing quality.
Cordially, Ismael
--
Ismael Valladolid Torres GnuPG key: DE721AF4
Jabber: ivalladt(a)gmail.com
http://usuarios.lycos.es/ivalladt/ Skype: ivalladt
7 Dec
7 Dec
2:49 a.m.
Arnold Krille wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2007 schrieb david:
Then my inability to make it work that way apparently owes its problem
to GIMP's design rather than its feature set.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Arnold Krille wrote:
Same for gimp. :-) Since some versions text is floated in a way that you can
edit it later on which means that it is not really rendered unless you do
something with it that breaks it... Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb david:
I agree, the
final text is rendered as a bitmap. But in Inkscape, that
isn't done until you export the image. So in the meantime, you can
resize the text and do other stuff with it without losing any quality. Arnold Krille wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Dave Phillips:
>> I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to
>> be white, not black.
>> What would you use to do this ?
> Gimp!
> Either select the right color before you start creating the text.
> Or edit the text again and change the colors while editing.
> Or make the text its own layer and fill the whole layer with the color
> you want.
> Or...
> You could also try to do it on the commandline with "convert", but I
> think Gimp is _much_ easier to use.
I prefer adding text to images using Inkscape. Vector-based text comes
out much better than bitmap based text, at least to me.
After saving to a
pixel-based format (and I believe that dave means
pixel-based when he talks about images) that advantage becomes nill. And
gimp afaik uses the same font-engine as inkscape to render text. And yes,
inkscape renders text! To screen and to the exported pixmap/image... 
5 Dec
5 Dec
9 a.m.
On Wednesday 05 December 2007 07:16:38 Dave Phillips wrote:
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to be
white, not black.
This is actually simple. I don't use gimp much but seemed to remember doing
it. I just fired up a session and ran the test for you.
It worked.
Here is what to do...
1. Load the image.
2. Click on the test tool.
3. Click on the little curved double arrow by the two colours. This is to swap
white and black for the colour tool.
4. Click in the image where you want your test.
5. Type in your test.
5. Click close on the text entry window.
Done. Unless you want to adjust the location of the text.
I've wasted the last half-hour reading out-of-date instructions and
trying unworkable solutions. I'm giving up on the Gimp and I figure
there must be an easier way to do what I want, so once again I turn to
the masters.
What would you use to do this ?
Hope this helps.
Best,
dp
all the best,
drew
9:51 a.m.
Den Wednesday 05 December 2007 13.16.38 skrev Dave Phillips:
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to be
white, not black.
I've wasted the last half-hour reading out-of-date instructions and
trying unworkable solutions. I'm giving up on the Gimp and I figure
there must be an easier way to do what I want, so once again I turn to
the masters.
What would you use to do this ?
Inkscape
http://www.inkscape.org/
regards,
/bengan
10:18 a.m.
Greetings,
Okay, okay, the Gimp. I figured out where I was going wrong. You guys
were right, it's very easy. My mind is on vacation...
I just like menu items that say things like Change Text Color.
Thanks again !
Best,
dp
11:26 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
FWIW, which may not be much, there is a pretty good book on the current
version of Gimp It's called _Beginning Gimp: From Novice to Professional_
by Akkana Peck. The previous books I've read have all been unhelpful
recitations of the functions behind the menu choices and the tools. But
this book actually tells you how to do some actual projects. Here
is a link to it on Amazon.
http://tinyurl.com/3ytx6e
Dave Phillips wrote:
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I have an image. I want to add simple text to it. I want that text to be
white, not black.
I've wasted the last half-hour reading out-of-date instructions and
trying unworkable solutions. I'm giving up on the Gimp and I figure
there must be an easier way to do what I want, so once again I turn to
the masters.
What would you use to do this ?
Best,
dp
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHVsNETi5xeapaTM0RAoLyAKCf0lbn0isAwltK3gTLg/qUuHau8QCdGcb4
S7TLvWshHB3PJvjkd8B/q4M=
=pSr5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
12:08 p.m.
On Dec 5, 2007 2:16 PM, Dave Phillips <dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> wrote:
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I'm sure it is, but I can't see how.
My GIMP frustration is when pasting into an existing picture; I get a
new layer, and I can't do anything until I anchor it. When I anchor
it, the layer and any selection involved with it disappear.
Probably as simple as looking it up or asking online... haven't gotten
that motivated yet.
-Chuckk
--
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
12:19 p.m.
On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 18:08 +0200, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
On Dec 5, 2007 2:16 PM, Dave Phillips
<dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> wrote:
Click the "New layer" button in the layers window to create a new layer
from the pasted data.
--ll
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I'm sure it is, but I can't see how.
My GIMP frustration is when pasting into an existing picture; I get a
new layer, and I can't do anything until I anchor it. When I anchor
it, the layer and any selection involved with it disappear.
Probably as simple as looking it up or asking online... haven't gotten
that motivated yet. 
12:28 p.m.
On Wednesday 05 December 2007, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
On Dec 5, 2007 2:16 PM, Dave Phillips
<dlphillips(a)woh.rr.com> wrote:
It's a user friendly applications, as opposed to a beginner friendly
application. Frustrating at first, but I'd rather have that than an
application that's constantly awkward and backwards, just to help
beginners get started.
Greetings:
Is it possible for the Gimp to be more obtuse ?!
I'm sure it is, but I can't see how. My GIMP frustration is when pasting into an existing
picture; I get
a new layer, and I can't do anything until I anchor it.
You can move it around, and most tools (color, transforms, filters
etc) will operate on the Floating Selection as if it was a normal
layer.
When I anchor it, the layer and any selection involved
with it
disappear.
Right; you could think of anchoring as *actually* pasting it - and
it's pasted into the layer that was previously selected.
If you want to keep it as a separate layer, right click on it in the
Layers pane and select "New Layer..." Note that the new layer will
only be as large as the pasted selection! You can use "Layer Boundary
Size..." or "Layer to Image Size" to change that at any time.
And well... I'll stop here, before it becomes yet another GIMP
tutorial too long for people to actually read. ;-)
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.------- http://olofson.net - Games, SDL examples -------.
| http://zeespace.net - 2.5D rendering engine |
| http://audiality.org - Music/audio engine |
| http://eel.olofson.net - Real time scripting |
'-- http://www.reologica.se - Rheology instrumentation --'
2:01 p.m.
On Dec 5, 2007 6:24 PM, David Olofson <david(a)olofson.net> wrote:
...but now I get it, thanks!
-Chuckk
--
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
On Wednesday 05 December 2007, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
The main thing I notice is that I can't select any other layers until
I anchor the new one...
My GIMP frustration is when pasting into an
existing picture; I get
a new layer, and I can't do anything until I anchor it.
You can move it around, and most tools (color, transforms, filters
etc) will operate on the Floating Selection as if it was a normal
layer. When I anchor
it, the layer and any selection involved with it
disappear.
Right; you could think of anchoring as *actually* pasting it - and
it's pasted into the layer that was previously selected.
If you want to keep it as a separate layer, right click on it in the
Layers pane and select "New Layer..." Note that the new layer will
only be as large as the pasted selection! You can use "Layer Boundary
Size..." or "Layer to Image Size" to change that at any time. 
2:07 p.m.
> The main thing I notice is that I can't
select any other layers until> I anchor the new one...
The layers are like
transparencies - you can only paint on to the top transparency. If you want to do stuff
without anchoring them down then you need to raise or lower them accordingly from the
Layers menu.
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=Q…
2:19 p.m.
On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 19:07 +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
Not at all, when you use a paint tool it paints to the selected layer
regardless of whether where that layer is in the stack.
--ll
The main thing I notice is that I can't select any other layers
until
I anchor the new one...
The layers are like transparencies - you can only paint on to the top
transparency. If you want to do stuff without anchoring them down then
you need to raise or lower them accordingly from the Layers menu.
2:37 p.m.
Am Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2007 schrieb Nick Copeland:
But Chuck meant the floating layer in between steps (like after pasting
something from the clipboard). And he is right, as long as these aren't
pinned down to be either an independent layer or merged with another layer
(remember: Background is only a layer), you can't select or work with any
other layer.
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a rm / -rf. Or ask your
administrator to do so...
> The main
thing I notice is that I can't select any other layers until>
> I anchor the new one...
The layers are like transparencies - you can only
paint on to the top
transparency. If you want to do stuff without anchoring them down then you
need to raise or lower them accordingly from the Layers menu.
2:50 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The Akkana book says that the floating layers are artifacts of
a previous implementation strategy, which the Gimp developers
now believe was misguided. They are thinking of removing the
floating layers completely, but apparently it's easier to say
than to do. I believe, if memory serves, and why should it start
now, that she recommends always anchoring a floating layer right
away. She also recommends making new layers for everything you
can think of.
Inkscape is also pretty simple and seems to work well for this
kind of simple image manipulation. It's limited, but for simple
applications it seems to work well.
Arnold Krille wrote:
But Chuck meant the floating layer in between steps
(like after pasting
something from the clipboard). And he is right, as long as these aren't
pinned down to be either an independent layer or merged with another layer
(remember: Background is only a layer), you can't select or work with any
other layer.
Arnold
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHVvL1Ti5xeapaTM0RAoQ+AKCX9zf6nW+Vq6UuKFIjtIrhzYjU5gCggkl0
EZIHToMAwgpIyMSVsZJ0WmE=
=Aap5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
12:27 p.m.
On Wednesday 05 December 2007 05:16:38 Dave Phillips wrote:
Greetings:
What would you use to do this ?
-------------------------------------------->
GIMP <---------------------
dp
Dave
Gimp
1) Load the image you are editing.
2) Select the Text tool.
This opens the text control panel.
Which permits selection of font, size, etc.
and a color bar. click on the color bar opens the color selection panel.
Click in the narrow color bar selects the general color {red, blue ---}
in the adjacent square color window appears the color chosen and a
cross hair. Click anywhere in that window selects a tonality of the
color chosen, from very dark, in between to very very light. Click OK.
3) The color is chosen.
Hope this helps.
Tom
6198
days inactive
6200
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
28 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
Arnold Krille -
Bengt Gördén -
Bill White -
Chuckk Hubbard -
Dave Phillips -
david -
David Olofson -
drew Roberts -
Ismael Valladolid Torres -
Jan Weil -
Lars Luthman -
Nick Copeland -
Paul Davis -
Rob -
Shelagh Manton -
thomas fisher