David,
> peter sikking wrote:
>> We do imagine that a set of website graphics pieces gets _produced_
>> on a single canvas, and when everything works well together
>> graphically, with a single 'cutting mask' all pieces are cut out
>> and saved in the right web format, in a single action.
>
> I don't see how this can work in practice.
>
> I often need to hide or isolate layers before exporting the
> selection they
> affect
we were thinking the same, so a cutting mask is not part of a layer...
> and many selections are a very small part of an element's area (say 1
> pixel wide) because they will be tiled by the browser as part of a
> background
> image.
that is what we expect, too...
> In other words, some manual work needs to be done with the majority of
> web graphics taken from a concept.
can you tell me what you mean with "manual work needs to be done"?
that can help us with our work.
> Comparatively few images are cut out as they are.
I can clarify that in general we do not expect that some mock-up
is taken, and then the bits are cut out, and finished.
in general we expect that graphics artists set up the canvas and layers
in any way that works for them: sometimes a creating continuous area
and cutting out pieces from there, sometimes laying out pieces just
as a set adjacent to each other. Set up variations of sets of graphics
by duplicating layers, or by switching layers on and off, or by
switching GEGL operations on or off? do whatever you want, we can
handle it. use any combination of hand-made selections and one or
more cutting masks (these contain any number of selections), be our
guest.
we feel that with this flexibility we cam truly support web graphics
work in a flexible way.
thanks for your feedback,
--ps
principal user interaction architect
man + machine interface works
http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
