Gradient Along Path by Ofnuts

[Nidhogg]

Just found out Ofnuts has uploaded new python plugin on his sourceforge page yesterday, "gradient along path".
I love this, so cool outcomes. You can specify gradient width, precision, cap and join style, and miter limit.
I couldn't get it to work with 2.8 on Windows:
Calling error for procedure 'gimp-procedural-db-proc-info':
Procedure 'gimp-context-set-stroke-method' not found.
but it works with 2.10 on Xubuntu (otto-kesselgulasch PPA)



https://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-p ... s/scripts/

[racer-x]

Works in Gimp 2.10.1 AppImage once you delete 1st line in script.....

OFN_Gradient_path.jpg (64.26 KiB) Viewed 6941 times

[rich2005]

This is a plugin just for Gimp 2.10.x The g-f.net post says

First script to use new APIs in Gimp 2.10 (at last, the APi to stroke paths in "line" mode...). More or less a rewritten neon-path.

Generally no need to delete anything in the script. Works in Windows with the regular Gimp 2.10 and in a linux flatpak, although you might have some problems with the 32 bit samj portable (such is life).

not limited to lettering.

[racer-x]

I only had to delete 1st line for this script to show up in Gimp 2.10.1 AppImage, no problems with other versions of Gimp 2.10. Yes it works well with any path shape...

OFN_Gradient_path2.jpg (136.02 KiB) Viewed 6842 times

[ofnuts]

Works in Gimp 2.10.1 AppImage once you delete 1st line in script.....

OFN_Gradient_path.jpg

Must be a bug/shortcoming in AppImage. First line is perfectly legit for a Linux executable.

[ofnuts]

Just found out Ofnuts has uploaded new python plugin on his sourceforge page yesterday, "gradient along path".
I love this, so cool outcomes. You can specify gradient width, precision, cap and join style, and miter limit.
I couldn't get it to work with 2.8 on Windows:
Calling error for procedure 'gimp-procedural-db-proc-info':
Procedure 'gimp-context-set-stroke-method' not found.
but it works with 2.10 on Xubuntu (otto-kesselgulasch PPA)

[ Image ]

https://sourceforge.net/projects/gimp-p ... s/scripts/

The README file in the download page (which is also displayed with a nice formatting at the bottom of the same) explicitly states that this script requires 2.10 (if could possibly run in 2.9...).

[Nidhogg]

Yeah, I started foaming at the mouth and lost ability to read when I saw this cool new plugin.
Back when you did the stroke-or-fill-visible-paths plugin I hoped it could do this.

[ofnuts]

My closest script was neon-path, but it wouldn't do pointy bits...

[DrklyShvn]

Hey guys. I'm pretty new to GIMP but i'm not afraid to learn. I usually don't make posts because I am good at find the info I need in other posts. However, I found this potentially awsome script and I can't seem to figure out how to use it. I have installed it to the plugins folder, restarted GIMP and folowed the usage instructions contained within the zip. But no matter where I look, I cannot find Decorate>Gradient along path... It is not within my right click menu at all. I have tried right clicking directly from the paths list on the desired path. I have also tried activating it wil the paths tool and right clicking from there also. I am using GIMP 2.10.8 on windows 7 if that helps. Please help a brotha out! This script is absolutely essential to saving time on my projects!!! Thanks a million!

[Konstantin]

ofn.jpg (132.16 KiB) Viewed 6108 times

[DrklyShvn]

Yeah that's what I thought, however...

[DrklyShvn]

Okay so I've figured it out. As some python scripts can be run from folders, others can not I guess... This is one of them. I put the script directly into the plugins folder and it workes fine now. I wonder why that is? I have about 3 other .py scripts that I downloaded today and GIMP is smart enough to find them when I extracted them into their own folder. This one GIMP was not able to find within it's own folder... Weird...

Anyway, thanks for the help!

[ofnuts]

In Gimp 2.10, the plugin must have the same name as the folder. I believe the rationale is like this:

- There are simple plugins (one single Python file) and complex ones (several Python files, one "main" and various "modules")
- No real point in putting the simple ones in their own directory
- Having a specific directory for multi-file plugins however makes a lot of sense: easier to manage, avoids name clashes among "modules" from other plugins...
- But then it doesn't make much sense to try to run each individual module for registration. This will fail, and worse, Gimp would retry on each startup.
- So Gimp needs a criteria to find the Python file with the registration code(*). It could have been a fixed name (for instance gimp-main.py) but this would have made plugins hard to share between 2.8 (where the plugin subdirectories aren't looked up) and 2.10. The "same name as the folder" criterion, by contrast, still allows plugins to have an expliclt name

(*) Of course,if it were only for Linux & OSX, Gimp would just rely on the "executable" flag, that doesn't need to be set on the modules. So that behavior must be for the benefit of the Windows users.

[Nidhogg]

What's the reason to put user made plug-ins in Gimp installation folder and not the user plug-ins folder in AppData/Roaming/GIMP?

[DrklyShvn]

In Gimp 2.10, the plugin must have the same name as the folder. I believe the rationale is like this:

- There are simple plugins (one single Python file) and complex ones (several Python files, one "main" and various "modules")
- No real point in putting the simple ones in their own directory
- Having a specific directory for multi-file plugins however makes a lot of sense: easier to manage, avoids name clashes among "modules" from other plugins...
- But then it doesn't make much sense to try to run each individual module for registration. This will fail, and worse, Gimp would retry on each startup.
- So Gimp needs a criteria to find the Python file with the registration code(*). It could have been a fixed name (for instance gimp-main.py) but this would have made plugins hard to share between 2.8 (where the plugin subdirectories aren't looked up) and 2.10. The "same name as the folder" criterion, by contrast, still allows plugins to have an expliclt name

(*) Of course,if it were only for Linux & OSX, Gimp would just rely on the "executable" flag, that doesn't need to be set on the modules. So that behavior must be for the benefit of the Windows users.

I think I get what you are saying, but what is the reason for gimp executing one but not the other as shown below? Is it because the HTML read me was included in the same folder and thus GIMP became confused? The guides to path script executes perfectly within the folder...

[ofnuts]

Nothing in o-g-a-p that makes it folder dependent. Did you try to put it the common folder? What makes you say it doesn't run? You can't find the menu entry for it?

[DrklyShvn]

Nothing in o-g-a-p that makes it folder dependent. Did you try to put it the common folder? What makes you say it doesn't run? You can't find the menu entry for it?

Yeah the post with the pics at the top of this page from me were to show that it didn't run until I put the .py script in the plug-ins folder directly, instead of it's own indipendant folder. But it was the only time that has happened to me. I usually simply extract the zip file containing the script directly into it's own folder via the right click menu (right click on ofn-gradient-along-path.zip and select extract to "ofn-gradient-along-path\"). The only difference between this script and any other script I've run is that the extracted folder contained the HTML read me file. So I don't know. Are you able to recreate the issue on your end?

Thanks.

[mahvin]

Nifty path decoration, Ofnuts. Kudos!

[mahvin]

Accidentally came across a different way to make 3D Text. However there is a notable difference on effects depending on the style of font. Each work differently, so as hard as I tried, I could not make different font styles behave the same way in trying to obtain the same effect from another style of font. Experimentation may or may not enlighten you. Ofnut's technique (please donate beer money to him) is key to making this work, so check out what he says here.

The only thing I did differently was after inverting the selection on the text, I moved the saved path slightly diagonal a centimeter or two (try any direction) and then of course run GAP from the right click menu on that path. Keep your gradient width at 50 or higher, choose "very fine" for precision, and miter limit at zero. My first result surprised me (I was like WHOA!):



Determined to repeat the results, I tried using the same font, different letters, and didn't quite get the same results, although I did change miter limit to 4:



It was here I learned that lighting effects can be a serious PITA, so I moved over to Bump Map and started all over again, keeping the path intact, the same way in Ofnut's instructions, and got this result:



Just posting this in case you like what you see and want to give it a try, yourself.

[Pocholo]

That is pretty good Mahvin. I always say that if you're willing, you can learn new thing by experimenting.