Hi, On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:46 -0500, Rob Antonishen wrote: > I posted this as a bug, and was told by Sven Neumann the behaviour was > intentional and to raise it here. Thanks for bringing this discussion to the mailing-list. > The current behaviour is confusing to a user because of the following > fairly typical scenario: > > User wants to blur a portion of an image, but wants to save the > selection for later use. > > 1) make selection > 2) Select > Save to Channel > 3) Filter > Blur > Gaussian Blur > > Now the user is blurring the saved selection channel, not the layer > they started on. While I basically agree with you, I don't quite understand this example and why it is so typical. What is the user actually trying to achieve here? You say "User wants to blur a portion of an image, but wants to save the selection for later use.". How are these two related? Blurring the image does not alter the selection, so why would the user want to save the selection before blurring the selected parts of the image? IMO it would be a much more typical scenario to use the blur filter on the selection mask to make it more fuzzy. For that use case the current behavior is ideal: 1) make selection 2) Select > Save to Channel 3) Filer > Blur > Gaussian Blur Now this Blur was applied to the channel and it can be loaded back as a selection. Is it worth to break this workflow? Sven _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
