Hi. 2010/6/2 Jason Simanek <jsimanek@xxxxxxxxx>: > > A new layer is non-destructive. Why is there a need for this other type > of layer? The name 'floating selection' isn't even accurate. This is a > collection of pixels. It is not a selection. A selection is an ephemeral > mask not a collection of specific pixels. > . . . > Jason Simanek > Until some time ago, I also doubt the usefulness of this kind of layer. Recently, however, I discovered that the floating selections can be really handy, especially when they are put into action within the scripts. Often, indeed, with the purpose of obtaining a specific type of effect for a drawable through the Script-Fu language, it is necessary to make the script perform, one or more times, the fusion between the starting drawable and a new drawable, which is usually a modified copy of the first one. This combination can be accomplished either by merging the created drawable down or by anchoring it towards the original one, depending, respectively, on whether it has been added as new layer/channel or pasted as floating selection. But the first approach can be slightly destructive about the properties the initial drawable had - like its ID, opacity, linked state, layer's mask (if present), "lock alpha channel" setting, combination mode -, because the eventual drawable derived from the fusion won't keep any of them. Particularly, the loss of the ID voids the variable it was been stored in, so it becomes essential to re-define it every time like this: (define drw (car (gimp-image-get-active-drawable img))). The anchorage of a floating selection, instead, allows to really maintain the integrity of the drawable to which such floating object belongs, including all the important features listed above. _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
