On 25 June 2014 01:59, Michael Henning <drawoc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Joao: You might have misunderstood me. I'm referring to the blend > tool, not the gradient editor. Yes . I indeed was thinking about the gradient editor - just later I realized it was the actual application of the gradient on Canvas. My comment about the "shapped" ones however is valid - I think they should stay, even if terhe is no possible action for the time being. The shaped blends do require control as well, and it would be nice if we could be work ont hat for the future. If you look there, there is an open bug about the "offset" parameter not being used in the shapped fills (and the ending point is actually ignored). Maybe, adding some control there, the 3 "shaped..." fills could be made into a single one. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=505755 js -><- > > scl: Just the ones whose name starts with 'Shaped'. > > Ofnuts: Yes, Filters>Render is probably a better place than the bucket > tool, if we do move the shapebursts. > > Alexandre: I'm hoping to also hook up the live preview to update along > with any modifications of the gradient that happen in the gradient > editor. It isn't quite the same as on-canvas editing of color stops, > but if you're doing that sort of work, it should become it a lot > nicer. > > peter: > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:49 AM, peter sikking <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Michael Henning wrote: >>> * I'd like to make the blend tool generally more interactive. By >>> this, I mean that after the user has created a gradient, they will be >>> presented with handles that they can use to modify the endpoints of >>> the gradient before committing their changes. >> >> good plan. combine it with updating the colours of the >> endpoints to make it truly adjustable to get it _right_ >> >> hint: please do not make the endpoint handles small; >> think generous (more tens of pixels than single digits) and >> also show where the exact endpoint is in the centre of the handle >> (say, with a cross to aim). > > I had been imagining selection handles that are simply filled circles. > In my early prototype, they look like this: > http://i.imgur.com/t4g1zOE.png > > I think they are big enough, but they don't really show the exact > location of the endpoint. I guess I'll need to experiment with this > more. > > I have a feeling that If I make them circle outlines with crosshairs > in them, they'll look cluttered. Having just crosshairs won't make it > obvious that you can drag the points. Maybe drawing circles most of > the time, and then hiding the circles and switching to crosshairs > while dragging the points, would be good? (The idea is to show the > precise handles when they're needed during dragging, and then switch > to handles that invite grabbing for the remainder of the time.) > >>> * I'd also like to add a live preview to the blend tool so users can >>> preview the gradient and experiment with different options, before >>> committing their changes. >> >> yes, vital for making the previous point work. >> >> please make commit an implicit thing (moving on to another >> tool, starting another gradient) combined with explicit >> (e.g. <return>) as a backup. see handling of committing >> selections in the rectangular selection tool. > > Agreed. I wasn't planning to make starting another gradient commit the > first, but now that I think about it, that does make more sense. > >>> * I'm also planning to add undo support within the tool. >> >> I hope you mean: step-by-step undo while not committed, >> after a commit undo the whole committed gradient. > > Yes, that's exactly the plan. > >> again: vital, to make other points above _really_ work. >> both for the interactive part and as a form of non-committing >> >>> * The general consensus within the dev team seems to be that the >>> shapebursts (all of the gradient types currently marked "shaped") >>> should be moved out of the blend tool. They would likely be moved into >>> either a menu item, or (maybe?) within the fill tool. >> >> as far as my thoughts go: there will be more working >> with (vector) shapes in the future, and modifying those >> shapes with a gradient fill (by the gradient tool) >> could be the way to handle that. > > Hmm, you might have misunderstood what I meant by shapebursts. The > shapebursts are special gradients that mimic the shape of your > selection (currently labeled "Shaped (angular)", "Shaped (spherical)", > and "Shaped (dimpled)"). Anyway, at this point I'm really conflicted > as to what should be done with them. I'm not sure whether they belong > in the blend tool or not right now. > > Anyway, thanks for the input. > > -- drawoc > _______________________________________________ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx > List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
