On 4/19/06, GSR - FR <famrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > dneary@xxxxxxx (2006-04-19 at 1158.08 +0200): > > > How is this fairly straightforward with the current architecture? I > > > would rather say that it is currently almost impossible to implement > > > sanely. > > Ah, but I'm insane. > > Add a layer type for effect layers, and define 3 operations that you can > > associate with the layer (to start): curves, levels and colour balance. > > All the operations are pixel-by-pixel, which should make things easier. > > Then hack the projection code to add a special case for an effect layer. > > Internally I would say they are blend modes. Make them special so > content is fixed and flat (better compression), so only layer mask > matters. Then make the formula for the blend mode be curves, levels, > colour balance... whatever you can find that is pix to pix (and > probably LUT based in many cases, if not all) and make it work in BG > while the FG is unused. The settings would be stored in a parasite. Excellent idea. Unfortunately, when people say they want layer effects most of the time what they mean is that they want spiffy auto-drop shadows. Of course, that's not that hard to represent with a few parameters. But it's not exactly something you can implement with a LUT. Still, I think it's pretty doable as a custom layer. Perhaps implementing some as blend types and some as custom layers is a good plan. Rockwalrus _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
