HOME | DD
C-quel — Inkscape 0.47 Filter Guide
by-sa
Published: 2009-11-11 06:45:46 +0000 UTC; Views: 27450; Favourites: 95; Downloads: 1134
Redirect to original
Description
This is a sample guide for all the Filter Effects available in Inkscape 0.47. A Filter Effect is an overlay on top of a vector object that visually modifies it to take on the qualities of a raster-based image. This allows for the rendering of complex shapes and textures that would normally be impossible/impractical to recreate using only vector paths, strokes and blurring effects. Since these are only overlays, Filter Effects can be enabled, disabled and modified by the user at any time.Filter Effects have been around since 0.46, but the latest version integrates them better so that they are easy to access and use via the Filters menu option.
The source file can be downloaded here: [link]
Related content
Comments: 90
Hello there.
Sorry to say, I haven't used any of the much newer versions of Inkscape, so I wouldn't know what the deal might be, other than perhaps some compatibility issue. Best people to ask would be either the filter writer, or the Inkscape peeps (though granted, both are very hard to get a hold of).
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
U R WONDERWOMAN...MAKING THINGS SO EZY FOR US!
just a request here-how do i install Inkscape Cartoon Filters into Inkscape version: 0.48.4, which I am presently using....THANK YOU
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hello there,
lol, "wonderwoman", that's a new complement I've heard of.
Now do bear in mind this Inkscape guide is plenty old, so I actually haven't been keeping up with developments in Inkscape. However, it does seem like the filters haven't been updated to 0.48 at all (perhaps waiting to skip a version?), so you may not be able to use it for anything other than 0.47? You can always follow its instructions to test if it works in 0.48.4.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
there are no instructions given...thanks anyway.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh sure there are, look in the description of that filter set:
[link]
All you need to do it seems is to unzip the contents into Inkscape's Filter folder (not sure where since I don't know if you're a Mac, Windows or Linux user, but you can find out). Assuming the filters will work in 0.48, they should be available in your Filters menu next time you restart Inkscape. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
You seem to have a pretty solid knowledge 'bout inkscape. I've recently started using it. Is there anyway to expand the distort-filters into paths? (For cross-platform usage)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah thank you, although I guess you could say I "HAD" a pretty solid knowledge of the program, since I used it the most back in the 0.44 and 0.45 days. So much has changed that I feel like I've been left behind, but well I'm still willing to help. ^^
The filters are actually only perceptual ones that affect how we see the objects using our naked eye,... but the underlying shape is still a standard path or stroke. So there's no way to directly convert the perceptual shape into a path.
However, like an OCR scan, you CAN convert a perceptual shape it into a tool path using a perceptual tool. That can either be a Fill Bucket, which will help you "trace" the outlines of odd distortions, if all you need are the shapes. Or if you need textured distortions, you can export the image as a large, high-quality PNG, reimport it, and then use Trace Bitmap. If the resolution is sufficiently-high, the trace will be of sufficiently-faithful to the original distortion filter.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Damn 
I ask because I want to be able to edit in them even in illustrator or other vector editing programs that don't support on the filters
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I see, well the process I described should work, but again Im not much if an expert in the newer features -- you might have to ask a younger expert if there's a feature (existing or future) or plugin that Im not familiar with. Im sure this must have been brought up by somebody at some point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you're actually one of the first inkscapers i've met after going to inkscape
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ah, that's cool. In that case, I'm sure you're well acquainted with my ancient tutorial on it too...
[link]
You can probably find more Inkscapers at the official forums,...
[link]
...but bear in mind that it's quite possible that Inkscape may not have what you're looking for. Illustrator does have huge corporate backing with a large development team and access to special patented software technology, so it will always have more bells and whistles than a free software project done as a public service.
Heck, I used to be an Illustrator user too, so I knew exactly what I was giving up when I migrated to Inkscape back in 2006... but in my case the benefits outweighed the cons, so I happily stayed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh i know what I'm giving up upon - but don't mistake that for being a weakness to InkScape. Inkscape is based upon standardized fileformats, as well as openSource drawing it's strenght from community
So far InkScape does seem like a viable solution for me, even towards a professional basis. It's just a matter of finding work arounds for a few things, and still yet find out which of the filters is taster based and which is vector based (As I put a pride in doing 100% vectors).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep, you got that right... although sometimes the community needs a good technical and financial nudge forward from time to time. And unlike say Blender or Libreoffice, Inkscape is still not as wildly-used to get that kind of strength, hence why it sometimes seems they take their sweet time when in fact they're just working with what they got. ^^
But it could be WAY worse... it could be like Synfig, which is still a wildly-overlooked project.
As for your last point, here's some old documentation on the matter that might be helpful somehow:
[link]
[link]
I know that the native blurring feature takes directly from the SVG specification... but whether Illustrator is able to read this or not is still beyond me, since not sure they'd be in any rush to fully support a competing format, lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've never even heard about Synfig 
Thanks a lot of the links, I'd have a look
As for SVG I wouldn't completely call it a competing format, it's a standard format by the W3C's specifications. Something I'd imagine Adobe is slightly interested in, although it may not be their main interest.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Blender I would say is perhaps the best community FOSS product out there, since it is a powerful application with an intuitive UI (at least as of recently when they overhauled it), a strong and rich community, and with an open reception to market changes. It's a product that closely matches or surpasses competing commercial offerings.
And yes, Libreoffice was created when the people behind Openoffice finally got sick of Sun's mishandling and Oracles sabotaging efforts, and decided to continue the project under a non-profit entity. I helped fund it, so I'm partially a co-creator, hehe.
It's still a cow to use from time to time, but it's VASTLY improved from the original Openoffice and continuously improving in its penetration of the mobile and online collaborative market too which will be a huge boost to adoption. Something that no one in Sun/Oracle would ever dare to dream about. ^^
And yes, you and I call it a standard format,... but an Adobe and Microsoft would lump it under competition since it essentially means less $$$ in their pockets. That's why Microsoft sabotaged the ODF standardization by wrestling in the OOXML standard, even if it's unheard of to have two "competing" software standards, let alone one that's fast-tracked, and ultimately left largely unused by the entity that introduces it. >.>
[Adobe has been better, though... at least they opened up PDF, and they technically can't open up Flash due to a whole bunch of licensing mess going back from the original Macromedia days]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hm nice
and yeah $$$ be bitches :L
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for taking the time to do this. Very helpful!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hehe, I took the time to do this YEARS ago, I dobut I'd be able to replicate that any more these days... ahhhhh, how I long for more free time...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
My pleasure, thanks for using Inkscape! ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Not a problem. Enjoy your Inkscaping! ^^b
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh, this ol' thing? Glad its still of use to some people. ^__^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Any time. ^___^b
[although granted this is a little old by now] ^^'
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you so much. I just realized Inkscape had all these awesome filters and was thinking I would have to test them all myself. Which is a horrifying thought for someone as lazy as I am! But you have done the work for me. Thanxoxo
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not a problem, I live for Inkscape.
Granted this is for an older version and it only has that single example. I know another Deviant wanted to create an alternate version with a more complex colour sample, but not sure if he did it yet or not. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh wow! Just when I was sniffing around for an Inkscape filters list and about to give up and make my own, I come across this. Just what I was looking for! Thank you for taking the time to make this!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not a problem. It was getting on my nerves too, so I just sat down and did it myself. ^^
I've been too busy to check and see if 0.48 introduces new filters. On the other hand, another Deviant was interested in creating a new list with more robust examples, so chances are I won't have to. ^__^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks for the llama badge!
Really, Inkscape has so many functionalities, but they are all just Hidden in some corner. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well the tutorials that it comes with offer a kind of visual guide, even though it really does gloss over a lot of things. And a long time ago I did try to write my own visual guide...
[link]
...but it ended up a little bloated and eventually I lost interest (and so did my readers at that time).
Oh, and that would be , he's just a few posts down (or up, depending on your comment orientation, lol) ^.^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Heeey, that Inkscape Tutorial is really good! It does a very good job of presenting many basic aspects of Inkscape and show off some of the potential functionalities. For example, I only realized the possibilities of the Polygon tool recently. Your tutorial notes the possibilities from the start. Good work!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you. ^^
The original goal of the tutorial was to try and show my old forumites the potential of Inkscape as an Anime-style art tool. However, it was pretty hard just diving into character design, so I planned to devote the first two chapters to Inkscape basics.
It was meant to be short and sweet, but I learned a lot about the hidden functionalities of Inkscape (even some I didn't know at the time) while writing it, so it accidentally, uh,... bloated up.
I wish I could go back to finish it, but honestly I've lost the stamina to continue it and would rather just focus whatever creative energy I still have spared to my game development. If I could get behind some kind of team, that would be different -- but alone, fuggetabowtit.... I know myself too well, lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No problem, I understand the stamina thing very well myself. XD Oh! You're developing a game! That's interesting.
Still, the tutorial is still quite useful in my opinion. Even though as you've put it, it's 3 releases old, the basics didn't change much, so thanks again!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yep, still a verrrrrrrrrrrrrry early alpha, but it's shaping up nicely....
[link]
Just my partner and I have been stalled with a lot of RL stuff, and this is not a major FOSS project that has a life of its own yet (if ever).
And I guess you're right, the basics haven't changed much, if any. ^^
Well... maybe if I can backdoor my tutorials into some game gimmick (two of the characters are hardcore FOSS users), I might revisit them some day. ^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yaaay! That was really fun! 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hehe, you're welcome. Hope we don't fail to disappoint once the @CG project REALLY takes off! ^^b
Well "Pigux" is a real sponsor, cause that's my organization and I give money to LOTS of the other "sponsors" on the list, lol. [plus I commsioned a lot of the artwork in the gallery)
Heck, I'm even listed in the new Sintel movie credits (just look for "Arturo Silva" in the presale DVD section). ^___^b
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sintel is So Sad. 
Good luck with your projects!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hehe, well the GIMP team is now working on the single-window mode plus tabs. Having used the 2.7.x alpha, I can definitely say it makes a WORLD of difference. ^___^
But of course, it's worth pointing out it took an infusion of new blood to their dev team to get this addressed... >.>
Same with the Krita team,... it took a little courteous tough love from the Sintel team (then, still Durian) to bring about some much-needed improvements to their application as well. I'm definitely happy with the direction Krita is going (especially as a superb FOSS alternative to Paint Tool SAI), but it's also worth pointing out it took a pride-poking goal to get the creative juices flowing into overdrive. ^.^
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've been keeping an eye on Gimp development for at least 6 years... it took them that long to even Consider a single window mode (and now that it's out, we can say for certain that yes, it Is a good thing, and those who thought it wouldn't be did us all a disfavour these long years. Yes, I'm using the alpha version too
Another thing is their whole attitude towards people with interface suggestions. I've submitted interface suggestions to Gimp, Inkscape and Krita:
- Inkscape and Krita: Thanks!
- Gimp: Can you code? If not, get lost, you're just wasting our time. Besides, your idea has issues X and Y, therefore it sucks.
For a very long time, the Gimp developers also didn't seem to realize that it makes a Huge difference whether something could be done in 1 second or in 10, hence how slowly some brush options were developed for example. It took them so bloody long to get a brush resize in for example, and because they only value code, it took several people proposing over several years for them to accept to add more artistic brushes to the default brush set (even though people offered ready-made brush sets already). It would have only taken them a few minutes to update the thing, but would have a relatively big positive impact on a new user (after all, we're all impressed by shiny results).
Well, I'm rambling.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hehe, that bad huh?
Although I recall some posters complaining that they've been making that very request to the GIMP team for over 10 years. Plus the current approach to single-window mode is definitely the best for everyone, because it doesn't replace multi-window mode but rather offers both modes as a choice. I think we've established long ago that choice is a good thing -- people tend to work and look at things a little differently, and no matter how weird that may seem from one's POV, there's no harm in having an option to cater to a demographic different from one's own.
So those who railed against the possibility of choice were really holding the program back just by the very nature of FOSS.
But being as their only real challenger were proprietary programs, I think the old guard team felt perfectly in its right to stay entrenched as they did for many years, even to the point of not really allowing funds to influence developmental decisions.
If a more robust GIMP fork existed that rightfully stole the show away from the original program (a little like how Inkscape outgrew Sodipodi), then either the GIMP team would finally feel motivated to open their minds a little, or they would entrench themselves further to the point of being near-closed source. And in line with the matter of choice, I don't think anyone would mind the latter because it's still a choice for people who like GIMP as it is now and are adverse to changing that. Unlike them, I wouldn't rail against depriving them of choice. ^^
===========
Oh,and thanks for that cool feature in Inkscape! I can't say I've used it too much, but when I have I will admit it's quite awesome. ^___~
And thanks to their particular dev model, I'm confident one day we will see animation in Inkscape too, which is really my last standing wishlist item. ^.^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
10 years seems about right to me. xD You have pointed out a major irony in Gimp's case: Gimp's problems seem to arise from a lack of comparable (FOSS/Free-of-charge-wise) competition. xD
By reading the Krita mailing list, I also realized that there's an architectural problem involved too. In Gimp, when you have to tweak say... tools, you have to delve deep into the architecture. Krita is more "modular", it's easier to add all sorts of things. There actually were a few forks of Gimp here and there. In particular there was one with a single-mode window, and another called Gimp-Painter with some really neat brush enhancement. The problem is that they can't keep the rest of the features up to date as Gimp develops. They couldn't be added in as an easy extension or the likes.
Still, with Gimp, there was an attitude problem involved too. 
====
Oh, about that Inkscape feature, right now what people seem to do the most with it is to use it with Spiro curls to create those cool swirls. You can look up heathenx' screencast on spiro swirls. But that's not the only thing they're good for. You can make a chain segment for example and draw chains everywhere.
Animation will be awesome, but I suspect it will be a looooong time before we reach that point.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
hehe, sounds to me that GIMP is a little like OpenOffice in that it has an overly-complicated code base that few people would dare touch with a 10-foot pole (at least for free). ^.^'
I guess that would be a problem, and would definitely complicate any efforts to fork this thing as too much work would have to go into rewriting some aspects of it to make it more contributor-friendly. In that respect, it might be easier to take the Inkscape or Krita codebase and just build on top of it to get it to be GIMP-like (although I recall the old Krita already had some good image editing abilities, some of which were recently dropped to make it more painter-focused).
I do know of GimpShop, but I never heard of Gimp-Painter before, and that I think is the problem. Marketing is just as important to a FOSS project that wants to stay alive as it is to a commercial brand, and if forks want to attract people that will help keep it alive, they need to do more to advertise their existence.
I'm very confident in the survival of LibreOffice, for example, because it's able to sustain a fair amount of buzz and stay fresh in the mindshare of interested readers.
Others like GNote and Trinity, for example, could use a little more noise.
Now that I recall, while I historically would use Pattern Along Paths to create chains, I do recall creating a railway track using the other method I believe. But yes, those kind of continuous line patterns would be best served by this technology. ^^
hehe, and yep we're prepared for the long haul for animation, but I definitely consider it the final frontier for Inkscape, especially considering that the SVG format does inherently support it. And indeed while an "Animation Mode" would be the safest way to go to retain the same look and feel of the static drawing side, I think including at least a simple Animation timeline at the bottom (a la Poser) would offer a small enticement to explore the animation features.
And I think tweening in Flash was bogged down by the rather shoddy vector tools the program employed (at least back in my day), not to mention that tweening had to be declared explicitly rather than implied implicitly like it was in Poser (which I liked as an animation tool).
Reapply similar (or better) tweening principles in Inkscape, coupled with first-rate vector tools and a wonderfully-intuitive UI, and I think you can have a potential Flash killer in your hands. [certainly would have greater success than Synfig]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, I don't think Gimp-Painter meant to be a full-fledged branch. From what I understood, the author is a Japanese who likes CG, so he simply made available a few changes he made for himself. But if you want to talk about bad marketing, the current Gimp team itself is pretty bad at marketing.
First off the developers have made it clear that they don't really care what other people want (ouch), and then there's the name. I understand that "Gimp" has a reputation by now, but the Gimp team underestimates how quickly people get used to a new name. If they had changed the program's name years ago, by now everybody would be used to the new name, and a big portion of people would be able to put the program's name on their CV without wincing once or twice (citing the full name isn't much better). I mean, a Gimp is a bondage suit.
Inkscape with animation would indeed be the final frontier.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well again, that probably ties into the origins and core beliefs of the team. If they literally don't care what other people think, then they won't willingly "pander" to get other people to like them or their product. I would almost argue that it was the community outside the GIMP dev team that's tried to market their creation to the wider world, with limited success because they can't persuade the dev team to follow through with their newfound fame so their efforts ultimately fall flat.
It's similar to how I built this Inkscape tutorial many years ago....
[link]
...but due to lack of interest from my readers then and lack of interest/time personally, I've abandoned it and let it become woefully outdated. And yet I still have the occasional new fan that comes over, "oooh's" and "aaah's" about it, and urges me to finish it so I can wallow in praise and fame of the Inkscape tutorial.
But praise and fame doesn't necessarily appeal to me, apart from that I'd rather focus on my @CameliaGirls project. So if this fellow "markets" this tutorial to the wider Inkscape tutorial in the hopes I'd be pressured into continuing it, he'll just end up barking up the wrong tree.
The REAL solution to get things done is to basically take the source of my tutorial and continue it himself, or maybe as part of a team effort with other interested parties. That way, I still have the fame and praise for starting it, but the project could hypothetically soar in the hands of people genuinely interested in keeping it alive.
Hence, the aforementioned Fork.
Even if there is starting to be a little hope for the GIMP dev team to turn around, a genuine fork (freed of accusations of double-work) can do a helluva lot to stimulate interest, especially in a project with a history of stagnation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
> I would almost argue that it was the community outside the GIMP dev team that's tried to market their creation to the wider world, with limited success
Good point there... though I do see from time to time the Gimp devs wonder why there aren't more people joining them. Gimp and Inkscape had opposite approaches to new blood. Gimp sees people hoping for new directions as nuisances wasting their resources. Inkscape refers to these nuisances as ""new blood" (which) comes (with) new itches, new perspectives, new needs, and levels of excitement and motivation that tend to wane for most developers over time." (recent interview)
Well, new blood isn't impossible with Gimp, but it seems to take a lot of guts. When Gimp's brushes didn't go anywhere (whether on new features and new brush tips), Alexia Death, who is actually more of an artist than a programmer (my impression at least), somehow dived in there and coded the newer brush features herself. Really, my hats off to her.
As for the tutorial, actually, I'd say you don't have to force yourself. The Ideal situation is better documentation on the Inkscape page.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
[sorry for the small delay]
haha! is that so?
Well in that case the problem is much worse. They remind me of an old....associate... of mine who was pompous, arrogant, tackless and insensitive, but still expected people to like him, and was utterly distraught and confused when they didn't.
I was recently talking with one of my commissionees, who was in the process of drawing a work in either MyPaint or Inkscape (or both), but suddenly got an interest in using GIMP as well. And the hesitation I had in talking to her about the program was particularly frustrating, especially when I have rock-solid pride and confidence in Inkscape for example.
I talked a bit about my time back in 2006 as I was looking to relaunch my artistic endeavors and figured it was time to move out of ["borrowed"] Photoshop because clearly it's "vector" tools were not up to snuff for what I wanted.
["borrowed"] Illustrator was full-featured, but overly-complicated and its microscopic node handles annoyed the hell out of me.
["borrowed"] Flash was better, but too weird, and seeing as how it was all geared more for animation than drawing the tools really felt like an afterthought.
Other "borrowed" solutions had their own problems, and same for the true Freeware ones.
It was only when I came across Inkscape that I finally found the UI of my dreams, and it grew on me exponentially. It wasn't but 4 months later that I had finally weened myself off of Photoshop entirely (finding its own interface and tools very clunky by comparison), and worked 100% in Inkscape up until very recently when my Cintiq tool has rekindled my interest in raster-based art. ^^
So it says a lot of a program, and its team, when an old software pirate such as I can be converted so drastically so as to have my mind opened up to the world of community-based software. And even if it is free as in cost, I still donate regularly to their project (by now probably the cost of a full Photoshop license), and even add in the occasional mini-contribution....
[link]
Well, that's enough positive rambling on my end.
Also, good to know I don't have to worry about that tutorial then.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh yes, Inkscape's interface is so dreamy! Like that colour palette at the bottom. Why didn't anyone else think of that one?
And I know what you mean when you talk about weaning off "borrowed" programs. xD I started off as a Photoshop borrower too. I learned enough about it to know that for your average photo enthusiast, it was definitely overpowered.
Inkscape wasn't quite so developed back then though. Somehow I got into Open Source, and my dream back then was to be able to produce nice art in Gimp. I was enthusiastically waiting for some features, only to notice how painfully slow they were being implemented, like brush resize shortcut (I waited several years just for that!), layer folders (still nothing there) and a better brush set (should have been ridiculously easy to implement, but somehow wasn't, even when people proposed sets. I tried to lobby for that one too, along for the elimination of redundant round brushes, only to be told that they were hard to eliminate because filters used them, and because "the better solution would be to wait for brush labels to be implemented". Uh-huh, right. The developers also didn't want to make the brushes deletable for fear of users deleting them by accident, but they Also didn't want to have separate brush backup folders because they took up more hard-drive space. Oh come on, which year are we living in?)
Of course, I didn't know better back then, apart from the uneasy feeling that it certainly Seemed slow to develop. Then I came across Inkscape. Such a wonderful interface! And such a Friendly, open and dynamic community! It was amazing! Releases were relatively speedy, and each brought an avalanche of new toys, even when it was releases that supposedly focused on internal changes. The Inkscape community also doesn't stubbornly turn down alternate uses for its program. Technical drawing? Not what the original developers had in mind, but sure, go ahead!
There are still things I need in Gimp that I can't get as easily in Inkscape or Krita, so it's still an open-source must-have, but it's a pity. With a different approach, Gimp may have developed several times faster as it is now.
Oh! You're from Indonesia? Nice to see how others are doing their tiny bit in contributing to Inkscape!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>