Why does Gimp do this?

View -> Show Selection. Took me literally a minute to work that out a moment ago.

The software isn't the problem here, you fucking retard.

I like how paint.net which was meant to be a simple drawing and image editing program accidentally progressed to be better than most veteran open sores alternatives.

Or turn off antialiasing from the tool options

This

That's not what I was talking about, "retard". As you can see in the webm after I paste the layer and it's deselected it leaves a fuzzy outline around the part that was selected, not the actual selection line itself.
That works too, thanks for the help user.

ITT mongols
paintdotnet is free you fucktard

That's not what he's talking about retard.
This is the correct option.

Not free-as-in-freedom it isn't.

you're right desu i applogize
there is an open source fork from back when it was open source

Attached: file.png (500x500, 339K)

Why is non-free software always superior?

it's okay I forgive

Attached: 1523364616507.gif (476x498, 304K)

Photoshop does this too
It applies aa around the edge, which smooths it out, but loses some pixels in the process

>what is anti-aliasing

This explains the incompetence in making shitty meme images I see here where elements have been resized using NN interpolation and look like complete shit.

If selecting with anti-aliasing didn't produce a shitty looking outline I would use it

whoops meant for

Op are you here? Is it possible to copy-paste ASCII image from terminal and put in random wallpaper use gimp?

I can't understand what you're asking sorry pajeet

Photoshop does the exact same.

But I don't listen to the radio!

Attached: 1499508329454.png (889x500, 213K)

Disable aliasing on the left.

$$$$

It's called anti alias idiot. You can disable it.

Attached: GIMP is for non stupid people.webm (854x480, 1.32M)

>people being paid to do a job actually do it better than those that do jobs for shits n' giggles

Because it's how alpha-transparency works. How would you even expect it to be handled? Does Photoshit do it "better" in some way, and if so how?

I didn't even mention Photoshop in the OP, I don't know why everyone keeps bringing it up

krita is loads better
Gimp is a pile of garbage. It doesn't like working on Mate for me.

i used to wonder why this happened when i was developing a brush library for imagemagick, and looked into it a bit.
as someone pointed out, it's a result of anti-aliasing. but more specifically, it's the side effect of the unexpected math you get from multiplying alpha layers.
the edges of the section you extracted, as well as the original layer, now but now a percentage of an alpha layer along the edges of the selection. for simplicity sake, just assume the copied layer has 50% alpha along the edge (half of the original), and the original has the other 50% alpha along the edge. it would seem like common sense that putting it back together would bring back a full 100% copy of the original. but stacking 50% and 50% alpha on top of each other only produces 75% opacity. that is why there is a little bit missing.
there is a special blend mode, namely in after effects, that can accurately restore the original 100% alpha layer from two 50% layers, called luminescent premultiply.

Attached: tumblr_ovr2l2OpID1tj4v78o1_400.jpg (348x348, 31K)

Because you seemed to be expecting some different behavior, which you would have learned somewhere else, for which Photoshop was the obvious source.

>the unexpected math you get from multiplying alpha layers
How could that possibly have been "unexpected"?

50% * 2 = 100%. The OP made a thread asking why this effect happens. He wasn't aware that 50% * 2 alpha layers = 75% alpha. It isn't obvious to everyone.

sorry, 50 * 2 rather

You getting pissed over the boundary line? it's because you still have the pasted layer selected as the active one. That lassoed area is the entire layer, so it's being outlined. Either expand the layer to the image size, or click on the original layer (and it's boundary, the entire image, will be lined.)

Attached: DbMmHqmUQAAY4vE.png (900x1510, 1.48M)

Nope I've always used Gimp. I just assumed there should be a way to put something on a separate layer without leaving an outline, and turning off anti-aliasing happened to be the solution.
Very interesting, thanks user. I was wondering the same thing about why they wouldn't just overlap but that is strange how they only produce 75% opacity.

Correcto

See: (just realized I replied to the wrong, that one was meant for )

it is easier to think about alpha/transparency when you think of real world materials: if you have two pairs of sunglasses, both knocking out 50% of the sun, if you stack them on top of each other, they wont cancel out 100% of the sun.

I like the titty circles

>small things
I love your mouse gestures, thank you

is this the weekly gimp hate thread

So is there anything gimp does that krita can't? Or can I safely uninstall it.

Sad but true

gr8 b8

I take it that's a no?

Gimp unironically has a more usable interface than Krita.
Never before have I dealt with a program that so frustratingly does not want me to rapidly change brush sizes, strengths, or types.