On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 12:12:28PM +0100, Olof S Kylander wrote: > Well see in your own mail below where you say use PS mod keys/short cuts. > When you move a PS selection you move the selection it self. You aren't > making it into a floating selection. See more below. I'm just saying use > "to float" if you want to have a floating selection. This has a point. However, you _can_ use "Quickmask" to apply transformations to selections with the normal tools, just make sure your background color is set to 'black', since the background color of a mask is usually black. > Well what about how you move a selection is PhotoShop? Gimp uses the total > opposite of PhotoShop and many other Win/Mac image manipulation programs. > > The reason why Gimp uses to float when you drag a selection is because it's > still there since the days we didn't have layers. When you don't have > layers you want a float to be able to do selections and masks with in the > floating selection. > > Today this is very confusing --> the user drags a selection gets a float, > if he then try to make another selection (to e.g add) she will get a mask > with in the float. She will most likely start to say four letter words > now and leave Gimp to rest in peace. > > I say if you want a float use "to float", don't "force" an unaware user > into floating selections. I think this might be good. Though then the user needs to know that he needs to "float" a selection. If he doesnt know, a danger of 4-letter words is near also in this case. Basically the quickmask mode helps to perform the task without too much effort, but Olof's idea might make the concept easier to understand. Some people have problems when they try to use the selection tools to draw ellipses and rectangles. Maybe this could make it more clear that selections are selections, you use them to _fill_ them with something. You first create a selection, manipulate it if you need, and then fill it or something. Or cut parts of image with them. You can always "Cut&Paste" the selection (or Select -> Float) to get the float, and I think this is pretty intuitive for those who have some computing background? > Furthermore it is very important to be able to transform the selection (not > the selection with substance). Imagine that you want to select a round > traffic sign in a photo taken from an angel. This is done by making a > circle selection and the shear it. Today this is very cumbersome since the > transform tool will transform the substance of the selection and not the > selection it self. (Yes I have tried to use quick mask and make a > transform in the "red" image. It doesn't work or at least it doesn't work > in my CVS very uptodate Gimp. This is still a work around and not a good > solution.) This actually works pretty well, but like I said, you need to check your background color to avoid leaving ugly cut-out areas in the canvas. > > I think we have larger problems than UI ones right now, and I suggest > > people start fixing them. Eg: > > > > - shrink wrap redraws the entire image 3 times (yes, 3!) > > - redundant redraws in a number of other places > > > > These _really_ bite when working with (say) 3000x3000 images. > > Yea they probably do, but I think Mitch is a UI programmer and wanted > flames or Comments on the UI thing. Note: I'm not saying that we shouldn't > fix the redraw problem. They are also important, a slow application is not > user friendly. True. The GUI is as important as the core. Both things affect the user experience :) I understand Olof is concerned about the GUI because he has the GUM to write and to keep it up to date. It is much more fun to write about stuff that is clean and consistent :) And the good part is, he also is willing to help in the programming. I'm really happy of all you guys, I know I'm very dependant of your efforts to keep Gimp in the bleeding edge. Thanks for the great work :) Tuomas -- .---( t i g e r t @ g i m p . o r g )---. | some stuff at http://tigert.gimp.org/ | `---------------------------------------'
