hi, peter sikking wrote: > - 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'. on the other hand, showing the brush stamp gives a good preview of drawing. This can be taken to the extreme by setting 'idle' opacity to 100%. But then this only makes sense for drawing in normal mode on the top layer. And becomes totally useless for the dodge/burn tool. Adding contrast needs some thought -- at least the standard XOR 0x7FFF7F doesn't perform well using simple blending according to brush stamp alpha: http://yahvuu.wordpress.com/2009/08/30/scratch-trash/ somebody got ideas for better algorithms? > - 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. i'd love to indicate hardness somehow. Seems to me what's interesting is not so much the exact border of, say 25% opacity, but rather a hint about how wide the feathering is. greetings, peter _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
