David Gowers wrote: > I considered that modes might be how you meant to implement it. That is > definitely a large change in the way the user would use paint tools, we > should get Peter Sikking's input here for sure. Most users wouldn't normally have to play with those details. There could be a standard set of brush presets grouped under various tags which would contain at least one version of each mode (by default for example a fuzzy and a standard circle variant, freely scalable). Here's a quick and dirty mock-up of what I have in mind: http://i29.tinypic.com/wikarn.png > And we must make it visually clear that these are really properties of > the brush, to avoid user confusion > (A disclosure triangle would deal with this neatly) Yes, you're right. I haven't thought about this yet. > Another thing is that we have actions named like > tools-value-[12345]-(increase|decrease), etc which currently control > some brush parameters (value-1 is opacity, usually). With your > proposition, we should consider whether we need more actions so that the > user can do more quick changes by keyboard (for example, I'd like to be > able to toggle 'Apply Jitter' using a keyboard shortcut. And if 'Fade' > (and fade length) were bindable to keyboard actions, they would be far > more usable IMO. I think that anything that can be varied with pen tablet dynamics (I proposed that most numerically variable brush parameters would be) needs to have optional keyboard actions too. > oh, that reminds me, I gave the wrong URL, the correct URL is: > http://mypaint.intilinux.com Yes, I eventually figured it out and downloaded the Windows build. > Definitely, it will get developed more, that way :) True! -- SHIRAKAWA Akira _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
