(peter) yahvuu wrote: >>>> what about printing a semi transparent copy of the actual brush >>>> on the >>>> canvas? >>> exactly what I thought. >> >> Even though I think the patch made the brush outline better for >> fuzzy brushes, it is still not without flaws. Let's ignore the >> patch and aim for the above instead > > i guess what works best is to display the brush outline while > drawing and to use the brush stamp when idling. > > > If you want to test-drive the look and feel, here's a flash applet > featuring various outline designs: > http://sites.google.com/site/yahvuu/stuff/brushtester-web.lzx.swf8.swf?attredirects=0 I tried that, and although I would not call that exactly a solution, it did help to observe some things: - it is fantastic to see a fuzzy/grunge brush as a real "copy of the actual brush" when one is not painting, but it has to _contrast_ with what is under it or else it just disappears. When it contrasts (some X-OR variation, or so) I think it should not be semi transparent anymore, just exactly reflect the brush alpha value for each of its 'pixels'. - that really opens up what (dynamic) paint parameters should be reflected by the brush when not painting: looks like brush geometry (brush, scale, aspect ratio, angle) yes, hardness: maybe, rest (opacity, spacing, jitter, color(gradient)) no. - when painting, first I feel that this outline is a lousy representative for a brush. next I notice that getting the 'brush' out of the way and showing the immediate paint result rules. so now I am thinking: what about no outline at all and just a cross-hair for mouse position when the mouse is down? --ps founder + principal 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
