Re: [Gimp-user] alpha channels vs masks

[Elle Stone <l elle stone gmail com>]

Hi Bernie,

You are right. Open an image, create an empty transparent layer and
put the empty layer below the image layer. Create a mask on the image
layer and paint black where you want a transparent background. The
transparent layer automatically has an alpha channel and so does the
exported png with the transparent background.

So if you want transparent pixels, I guess you need an alpha channel.
However, if you are blending different layers together and you don't
need any transparent or partially transparent pixels in the final
image, then masks would seem to be easier to use because you can paint
on them directly.

On 9/28/12, Burnie West <west ieee org> wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 09:09 AM, Elle Stone wrote:
> > So again, is there anything that can be done using an alpha channel,
> > that can't be done using masks and layers, or vice versa?
> Normally, when I want a transparent background in a WEB image
> I will use the alpha channel. Never tried to do that with layer masks.
>
> How do you export an irregular foreground image with only alpha
> background to png and retain the transparency in the bounding rectangle?
>
>    -- Burnie
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-user-list mailing list
> gimp-user-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


-- 
http://ninedegreesbelow.com
Articles and tutorials on open source digital imaging and photography