There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

No no i grab it from git yesterday after comit http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/commit/?id=8cd272bb8024886822185e9c39be276bf1c97a4e

if u compare sources in attachment or in tar.bz2 file marked as new (broken for me) u will see
also u can make diff between them and between old version and new

On 04/25/2012 07:27 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

Can you just make a bug with a comparative test image of what you think is wrong?

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

No no i grab it from git yesterday after comit http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/commit/?id=8cd272bb8024886822185e9c39be276bf1c97a4e

if u compare sources in attachment or in tar.bz2 file marked as new (broken for me) u will see
also u can make diff between them and between old version and new

On 04/25/2012 07:27 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

--Alexia
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

so i sent comparative image test in first and second email

here is comparative image test and old and new source in one archive :

http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

On 04/25/2012 11:57 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

Can you just make a bug with a comparative test image of what you think is wrong?

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

No no i grab it from git yesterday after comit http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/commit/?id=8cd272bb8024886822185e9c39be276bf1c97a4e

if u compare sources in attachment or in tar.bz2 file marked as new (broken for me) u will see
also u can make diff between them and between old version and new

On 04/25/2012 07:27 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

Any results ?
and could u tell me why we change healing algo ? On 04/25/2012 07:27 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

New heal looks better to me. It doesnt blur so much. I dont know why it was changed. It's probably better somhow. You can argue on bugtracker if you want to, but there is nothing I can do about this.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

Any results ?
and could u tell me why we change healing algo ? On 04/25/2012 07:27 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

--Alexia
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

but kill color and it is nod good for retouch skin, it is possible to configure it ? in gimp settings probably (in runtime ) ?

On 04/27/2012 10:40 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

New heal looks better to me. It doesnt blur so much. I dont know why it was changed. It's probably better somhow. You can argue on bugtracker if you want to, but there is nothing I can do about this.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

Any results ?
and could u tell me why we change healing algo ? On 04/25/2012 07:27 AM, Alexia Death wrote:

There was a bug in the heal tool that could cause what you describe that had a fix committed yesterday. you probably can get away with grabbing the latest heal c file from git and building again.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:30 AM, miroslav talasek wrote:

old and new file is also included in archive with xcf file here
http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

-- MSc. Miroslav Talasek
Developer, Team leader
Seznam.cz, a.s.
Prague
Czech Republic

tel.:+420 234 694 722 fax: +420 234 694 115
gsm: +420 608 934 724
jabber: mirecta@jabber.cz
work-email: miroslav.talasek@firma.seznam.cz email: miroslav.talasek@seznam.cz
web:http://photo.talasek.sk

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

Any results ?
and could u tell me why we change healing algo ?

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=630028

And no, it's not configurable.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

and can i do it configurable ? and send u patch ?

On 04/27/2012 10:54 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

Any results ?
and could u tell me why we change healing algo ?

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=630028

And no, it's not configurable.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

I think the better way is to fix the tool and send a patch.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:01, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

and can i do it configurable ? and send u patch ?

On 04/27/2012 10:54 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

Any results ?
and could u tell me why we change healing algo ?

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/**show_bug.cgi?id=630028

And no, it's not configurable.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org
______________________________**_________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/**listinfo/gimp-developer-list

______________________________**_________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/**listinfo/gimp-developer-list

but fix mean return back to old algo for me , and Alexandre Prokoudine told that new algo is better for him

the right solution is use both algo and u may choose between them

what is the right way ?

On 04/27/2012 02:06 PM, Tobias Jakobs wrote:

I think the better way is to fix the tool and send a patch.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:01, Miroslav Talasek > wrote:

and can i do it configurable ? and send u patch ?

On 04/27/2012 10:54 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

Any results ? and could u tell me why we change healing algo ?

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=630028

And no, it's not configurable.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

Von: Miroslav Talasek

but fix mean return back to old algo for me , and Alexandre Prokoudine told that new algo is better for him

the right solution is use both algo and u may choose between them

what is the right way ?

Analyzing. In particular, why the new algorithm performs worse for your use cases and better for others.

This could lead to the result that there is no better approach for either case, or that there is a different algorithm that covers more use cases with a better performance.

Regards, Michael

Ok if u have some results I will gladly to test id

On 04/27/2012 03:51 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote:

Analyzing. In particular, why the new algorithm performs worse for your use cases and better for others.

This could lead to the result that there is no better approach for either case, or that there is a different algorithm that covers more use cases with a better performance.

On 27.04.12 15:59, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

On 04/27/2012 03:51 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote:

Analyzing. In particular, why the new algorithm performs worse for your use cases and better for others.

This could lead to the result that there is no better approach for either case, or that there is a different algorithm that covers more use cases with a better performance.

Ok if u have some results I will gladly to test id

Shouldn't you give an example of how it doesn't work for you first? Just saying "it doesn't work for me" isn't giving any insight in what's wrong (if anything)...

here is file in one layer is source in other is healing tool version from git and other layer is older version and last layer is schematicaly what i do

http://photo.talasek.sk/special/healtool.tar.bz2

On 04/27/2012 04:06 PM, Kurt Pruenner wrote:

On 27.04.12 15:59, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

On 04/27/2012 03:51 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote:

Analyzing. In particular, why the new algorithm performs worse for your use cases and better for others.

This could lead to the result that there is no better approach for either case, or that there is a different algorithm that covers more use cases with a better performance.

Ok if u have some results I will gladly to test id

Shouldn't you give an example of how it doesn't work for you first? Just saying "it doesn't work for me" isn't giving any insight in what's wrong (if anything)...

the new one (nod good for me) works more like cloning (kill target color) the old one (good from me) keep target color and is better for retouch skin structure

On 04/27/2012 04:06 PM, Kurt Pruenner wrote:

On 27.04.12 15:59, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

On 04/27/2012 03:51 PM, Michael Schumacher wrote:

Analyzing. In particular, why the new algorithm performs worse for your use cases and better for others.

This could lead to the result that there is no better approach for either case, or that there is a different algorithm that covers more use cases with a better performance.

Ok if u have some results I will gladly to test id

Shouldn't you give an example of how it doesn't work for you first? Just saying "it doesn't work for me" isn't giving any insight in what's wrong (if anything)...

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

but fix mean return back to old algo for me , and Alexandre Prokoudine told that new algo is better for him

Did I? Is it? :)

the right solution is use both algo and u may choose between them

what is the right way ?

The right way is to analyze why things happen exactly the way they happen and whether it's possible to implement it properly without configurations. If a particular proprietary application manages to not have it configurable and still do the job, certainly we can do too :) This isn't rocket science.

Let's just not treat confugurability as some sort of a silver bullet.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

I made another test
i made 4 colour picture and with heal tool copy center to all colour

On 04/27/2012 04:59 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

but fix mean return back to old algo for me , and Alexandre Prokoudine told that new algo is better for him

Did I? Is it? :)

the right solution is use both algo and u may choose between them

what is the right way ?

The right way is to analyze why things happen exactly the way they happen and whether it's possible to implement it properly without configurations. If a particular proprietary application manages to not have it configurable and still do the job, certainly we can do too :) This isn't rocket science.

Let's just not treat confugurability as some sort of a silver bullet.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

the old heal is on this bad but human skin isn't like this :D so new heal tool is similar like clone tool with not full opacity

U can see that new heal toool is more agdresive to target , kill it , this is not good for heal skin in portraits

i sen all images in attachment

On 04/27/2012 04:59 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Miroslav Talasek wrote:

but fix mean return back to old algo for me , and Alexandre Prokoudine told that new algo is better for him

Did I? Is it? :)

the right solution is use both algo and u may choose between them

what is the right way ?

The right way is to analyze why things happen exactly the way they happen and whether it's possible to implement it properly without configurations. If a particular proprietary application manages to not have it configurable and still do the job, certainly we can do too :) This isn't rocket science.

Let's just not treat confugurability as some sort of a silver bullet.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org
_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list