LUMINESCENCE DARKNESS
I am posting this script found on a web site that seems to be innactive, it has been updated to run on V2.4
but gives an "unbound variable" error whenever I select the Volute Abstract option.
I do not have the expertise to debug this. The link is for the luminescence script
plus the error image of what i get from the Volute Abstract portion.
The scripts are fronted by a menu that also does not work properly and i think was added later.
Hoping someone can help or advise!
http://abcdugimp.free.fr/gimp/telecharger/scripts/spoon-download.php

The author has defined a procedure name 'script-fu-luminescence-volute-abstract' yet when he registers the procedure he uses the name 'script-fu-abcdugimp-luminescence-volute-abstract'. It is this mismatch which is causing the problem.

The solution is to change the name of procedure being defined. Do you have the expertise to do this?

I'm guessing there are lots of other errors in this script:

Error while executing script-fu-abcdugimp-luminescence-volute:

Error: eval: unbound variable: apply-luminescence-volute

Some instances of the script work, others produce the above error.

And this one:

Error while executing script-fu-abcdugimp-affiche-images-luminescence:

Error: eval: unbound variable: apply-luminescence-entrelats

This would be a good learning opportunity for me, since I seriously want to understand script-fu more clearly. From what I have read at GIMP.org, and other sites, these unbound variables can no longer be declared globally before being defined. I see the example of how the let statement is used, but I am not certain what parts of apply-luminescence-volute and apply-luminescence-entrelats need to be added to a let statement. Would it be everything that is enclosed in parentheses for that variable?

My guess is that your guess is correct.



The script is basically well-written and updating it should indeed provide a good learning experience. While the problems you describe are common with older scripts, I believe the situation for this script is different.

Basically, the errors in this script seem to be the result of some incomplete copy-n-pasting of the procedure names. I would speculate that after writing the script, someone decided to change the names of some of the procedures to insert "-abcdugimp-" into the names. The reason for doing this is commendable and I'd like to address this in the next paragraph. Nonetheless, when they changed the names, they did not catch all instances of the old names and this results in mismatches such as the one I addressed in my preceding post. All of these mismatches need to be reconciled.

As to the naming conventions used when defining Script-fu functions, it is useful to have scripts that get registered with Procedural DataBase start with "script-fu-". The reason for this is so that other Script-fu scripts know not to include a 'run mode' (RUN-INTERACTIVE, RUN-NONINTERACTIVE, RUN-WITH-LAST-VALUES) as the first parameter when calling your script, while plug-ins written C/C++, Python, Perl, etc may need to do so. It is also a good idea to include your name or initials in registered Script-fus to avoid conflicts with scripts created by other people. For example, if I name a Script-fu procedure "script-fu-sg-isolate" then it will not interfere with an "isolate" script written by you. The "abcdugimp" appears to have incorporated this practice but were not entirely thorough in their execution.

I've checked every instance of these procedure name mismatches in my file. I'm beginning to think we might have two different versions. I found one instance of a procedure name not being identical. After I corrected it, the script still threw errors in different applications of its usage. Anything requiring either of these functions:

apply-luminescence-volute or apply-luminescence-entrelats

resulted in being declared unbound.

But are not those two procedures defined as 'apply-abcdugimp-luminescence-volute' and 'apply-abcdugimp-luminescence-entrelats' respectively?

I'm no coder, but for this Script, if I was a coder, I would look at his algorithm and just re-write the code instead of trying to debug the code that exists. Sound like way too many syntax and mismatched names to even attempt cleaning this one up imo.

If it comes to version 2.4
http://abcdugimp.free.fr/gimp/telecharg ... ipt-fu.php
after the removal of "-abcdugimp" (x20) script works well

Your script update works Mario, but don't really see a use for it personally, but other's may. Thanks for posting it.

Well, Lyle. Try intermingling these background patterns into various kaleidoscpic images and you'll start to go "hmmmm...." I have so many variations of interesting effects, I just don't want to overdo the Self-promotion, hahaha...

Ohhhhh wait! I belong to the club! I'll share some examples later. :O

Ok, shameless self-promotion of why I try to find a practical use of ANY script or plug-in. First, I have to step outside the weave of our universal fabric and look at the frayed strands and attempt to picture a galactic rug-maker (PhotoComix comes to mind, often) working creatively with his craft.

Sorry for all the wordy stuff, peeps, I'm trying to be funny.

Then I either find a brilliant concept, or fail miserably, but do try again and again.

First a teleidoscoped image run through G'MIC's regular array filter, to make it entirely seamless:


Then I use the Luminensce script to create some funky pattern (I really wish that scripts could leave layer ID on what script performed on it, life would be so much easier in making tutorials). This was the Reflet option and I set the width and height to reflect my original teleidoscope image, and used a bit of unsharp mask to enhance it:


Then pasted the resulting image as a layer on my original, performed G'MIC regular array and set layer mode to overlay:


It gave the original image some much needed depth.

Thank you to all who helped me with the script especially Saulgoode whoes advice steered me on the
right path. I now have the Script fully functional without errors,I am just changing the menu's
to English and tidying a little. But i would like to know how to post a ZIP file.
Everything else is fine and i've enjoyed the experience as nothing is a problem when it's just a solution
waiting to happen. I've found that the menu part of the script displays all the possible outcomes from the respective sub menu's as layers.

just got to the full reply editor and along the icons toward the right is "Upload File"

hopefully, that should do it

I tried using "Upload File" Image but it will not allow zip files.Available extensions are-
swf, gif, jpg, jpeg, png, apng, bmp, tif, tiff , but thanks for trying.It seems to want a URL
unless I'M doing something wrong which is very plausible.

http://www.mediafire.com
Check it out

Thats just what I was looking for thank you Willy.Now i can Upload the Luminescence file when
I'm finished with the menu-well I actually mean when Google Translate and i are finished.

I was going to suggest that too. I use it and it works fine for things like this

Try to send the zip file as an attachment (upload attachment), there should be no problem.