​I​
f you scale your original 200%, you'll end up with a 2048x1536 image. ​Use the crop tool and manually enter a crop box of 1920x1020. Move the crop around to get the best view. You can see that you'll loose a bit of vertical image (1436 less 1080), but almost all of the horizontal image (2048 less 1920). Alternatively, set the scale height to exactly 1920 and you just have to move the crop box up or down to the best "view" before you crop it.

Hope this makes sense.

Regards.

Guy Stalnaker jimmyg521@gmail.com

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:03 PM, fenpeppertree wrote:

I have an image I downloaded from the Internet that has an image size of 1024 x
768. I would like to use this image as a desktop background at a resolution of
1920 x 1080.

This is a Halloween image, and has a moon within the image. When scaling the
image from 1024 x 768 to 1920 x 1080, the moon becomes stretched and no longer
appears circular.

Is there a way to increase the image size and alter the resolution without effecting the image content scale (the moon retaining a perfect circular shape)?

--
fenpeppertree (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) _______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
List address: gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

On 03/24/2017 04:03 PM, fenpeppertree wrote:

I have an image I downloaded from the Internet that has an image size of 1024 x 768. I would like to use this image as a desktop background at a resolution of 1920 x 1080.

This is a Halloween image, and has a moon within the image. When scaling the image from 1024 x 768 to 1920 x 1080, the moon becomes stretched and no longer appears circular.

Is there a way to increase the image size and alter the resolution without effecting the image content scale (the moon retaining a perfect circular shape)?

Not if you are changing the proportions of the image as a whole: The moon will change to conform to the new aspect ratio. But you can scale the source image to your desired height or width, keeping the original aspect ratio, then crop the image to the desired width or height. Try it both ways (scale the smaller image to 1920 width, and see if it can be cropped to suit your purpose.

Another thing to try: Use the Tool Options dialog to manually set "Allow growing." Manually set the height and width of your crop selection to the desired size, which will extend beyond the original (1024 x 768) image boundary. Then set Fixed Aspect ratio in the crop tool dialog. Now you can play with the crop area freely by clicking and dragging the corners and edges, to make it fit around whatever parts of the original image you want to keep. Crop the image, and scale it up to your target dimensions.

:o)

"Is there a way to increase the image size and alter the resolution without effecting the image content scale (the moon retaining a perfect circular shape)?"

Yes. Make sure the chain icons show the chains as LINKED. The linking is hard to see. That will preserve the aspect ratio (height to width).

Rick S.

-----Original Message----- From: fenpeppertree
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 4:03 PM To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Cc: notifications@gimpusers.com
Subject: [Gimp-user] how to change image resolution without effecting scale within the image itself using gimp as in retaining the roundness of the moon etc.

Here is the in-between image for the other two. The one with the 'ovalish' moon.

There are all sorts of ways to get a result from the original. In the eye of the beholder comes into play as well.

I would do something like.

Scale original to 1920x1080. (1)

As another image scale original 1440x1080 Preserving proportions (2)

Stack the images (2) on top of (1) and add a layer (black) to (2)

Paint out with a fuzzy brush, depending on taste, the moon, flying witch, the 3 main figures, maybe some of the foreground. The intention is to keep original proportions for those.

New from visible, and maybe a little sharpen.

Sounds complicated for my very basic knowledge. I do not know how to 'stack' or add a 'black layer' and the rest----paint out with a fuzzy brush or where to access the sharpen dialogue.

I would really like to know how you got two images included with your post; having a real problem understanding this forum's posting design. Most forums have an edit button that allows for editing after the post, and the fact that I cannot get more than one image included with my post is really irksome. Then there is the captcha malarky at the end of it all; even more irksome.

Yes, the mailing list format is terrible for a forum. You see the difference in user names, Blue is using this forum. White is via a mailing list. Half the time post are not seen by one side or the other. Then no posting etiquette, top posting, no editing rules.

There was a typo that I was unable to correct, 'black layer' should have read 'black layer mask'. You will get to layer masks one day.

How to add more than one image.

Add a title

Choose the file

Click on Add attachment

repeat the process

See screenshot

On 03/26/2017 04:43 PM, rich2005 wrote:

Yes, the mailing list format is terrible for a forum.

This is a mailing list.

A third party has decided to expose it as a forum.

Regards,
Michael
GPG: 96A8 B38A 728A 577D 724D 60E5 F855 53EC B36D 4CDD

This is a mailing list.

A third party has decided to expose it as a forum.

That is why I generally only reply to posts that are obviously from people who signed up for the forum.

Made an exception for exalted member of Gimp community.

Perhaps it would be better if the mailing list completely blocked the redirect (if possible) Failing that stop, mailing list participants replying to posts made by forum members.

I gave up on mailing lists back in early 90's Waste of time once M$ came up with Outlook and users gave up on properly formatted replies. I am sure you know this one and it does not apply to you, but how many times do you see a 'thanks' followed by a page of scrambled posts. -------------
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.

Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

A: Top-posting.

Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?