C R (cajhne@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > C R (cajhne@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > > A pixel brush seems like an adequate replacement for that functionality.
> >
> > Again, no.
> >
> > Try working with a pixel brush in a bigger magnification and check how
> > the pixel-grid-snapping of the pencil tool makes a huge difference to
> > the paintbrush.
>
> If there's no anti-aliasing on the pixel brush, please explain how it would
> differ from the behaviour of the pencil tool.
>
> I think you'll find it wouldn't. :)
Have you actually tried to do what I outlined above?
The paintbrush tool resamples the brush when the pixel grid of the brush
is not perfectly aligned to the pixel grid of the image.
A perfect non-antialiased 1 pixel brush typically gets spread across
four adjacent pixels in the image, assuming you're working with a high
zoom level and don't specifically align the brush to the pixel grid of
the image.
The pencil tool doesn't do that.
Bye,
Simon
--
simon@xxxxxxxx http://simon.budig.de/
_______________________________________________
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
