Hello, > On Wednesday 24 September 2008 11:03:43 David Gowers wrote: > This is because it violates the normal behaviour of alpha, which is > a specifier of opacity for a particular color; without a color, an > alpha value is meaningless. Like black color is a max.dark blue (or red, or even white) it is similar to totally transparent color -- it is black/white/red/etc with opacity reduced to 0%. > Also, the 'semitransparent color' usage and the 'erasing' usage are > directly contradictory. Semitransparent color could work in a > fairly normal way, erasing would have to replace the underlying > pixel values rather than blending them. Why? Look -- transparent color is a way to produce an image. You can do this already (produce an image). So the effect is the same, the way differs. And now, you would like to erase part of the image -- why now existence of transparent color makes a difference? The images in both cases are the same. The problem I see now is the layers -- i.e. to keep the current workflow, yet to being able to use transparent colors with them in intuitive way. So there is obstacle, indeed. And till now I have no idea how to solve this. Kind regards, _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
