2
In photoshop when I transform an image(layer) and make it smaller, then decide later that I want it bigger no quality is lost, however in gimp when I resize an image(layer) and make it smaller it loses the resolution it used to have so if I resize and make it bigger it doesn't have near the same quality it did originally. Is there a way to play with layer size in gimp without losing resolution everytime you make an image(layer) smaller?
4
Indeed - as for the current versions (even development version), there is no "non-destructive editing" in GIMP. When you downscale an image, you send pixels away. For a limited time, on the same GIMP session, you may use "undo" to get to your original image.
Otherwise, I'd recommend you to make a copy of your layers, turn the original one invisible, and play around with the copy. Whenever you change your mind and want the orignal back, just make another copy from the original layer - it will remain around as long as you save your image as an .XCF file .
jsbueno
Posted 2012-02-20T04:45:16.163
Reputation: 695
This is correct. Unless we were dealing with vectors, the original layer must be saved, either manually or behind-the-scenes. – iglvzx – 2012-02-21T04:45:56.207
You could play with the image's DPI setting, but that is obviously rather crude. Making an image smaller at the same DPI without making it have fewer pixels is just not within the laws of nature. – tripleee – 2012-02-20T05:04:01.693
No but what photoshop does is that while it displays a smaller version of the image for you to play with when you downsize it still keeps an original of the layer so that if you later decide to enlarge it it can do that without losing quality because of the downsize you did. IF gimp doesn't/can't do this that is a non starter and it's back to stupid adobe – None – 2012-02-20T05:17:36.960