> So if we get brush option to turn anti-aliasing off, we'll have 3 tools to > make pixel art with.. Hahaha! What do you want to bet it probably works /slightly/ different than either results from no anti-aliasing on brush, or the how the Pencil tool works. smh. ;) Obviously we have some things to decide. I still recommend adding the no anti-aliasing option to the brush though, to use to test agains these other methods. -C > > > -Petteri > > > On 22.6.2016 13:40, Simon Budig wrote: > >> C R (cajhne@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> >>> Have you actually tried to do what I outlined above? >>>> >>>> >>>> Have you? lol >>> No - I haven't. It's not currently possible to turn off anti-aliasing on >>> the brush tool, so it's not possible to "test" it. >>> >> Ah, sorry. I missed that we're discussing hypothetical future >> characteristics of the tools here. I was just looking at the current >> difference between the pencil and the paintbrush tool. >> >> However, knowing how anti-aliasing works, your statement is incorrect... >>> >> Well, if you choose to label the behaviour I described as >> "pixel-grid-snapping" (or the lack thereof) as "anti-aliasing" then it >> is not me who is making the error here. I actually don't think that they >> are the same. >> >> The paintbrush tool resamples the brush when the pixel grid of the brush >>> >>>> is not perfectly aligned to the pixel grid of the image. >>>> >>> Yes, but with anti-aliasing turned off (which you can't presently), it >>> wouldn't. >>> >>> 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. >>>> >>> I don't know why you would assume that. :) >>> It's incorrect at any rate. >>> >> This is *exactly* what the current paint brush tool does. And it really >> is no rocket science to test it. Just do as I explained above. I even >> did just a few moments ago, even if I knew this behaviour for years. >> >> Anti-aliasing IS what average pixels to spread over a 4-pixel block. >>> If you turn it off (which, again, you can't currently in the brush tool), >>> and a single click with a 1px brush fills more than one pixel, then that >>> would be incorrect behaviour. >>> >> The Pencil tool does two things (compared to the paintbrush) that are >> independent of each other: >> >> a) it thresholds the alpha channel of the brush (with a quite low >> threshold) >> >> b) it snaps the pixels of the brush to the pixels of the image, so that >> no resampling occurs. >> >> This is the *current* state of Gimp. And it has been like this for ages. >> >> If we want to put that as an option into the paintbrush (and lose the >> pencil) then describing both of these behaviours combined as >> "anti-aliasing" is IMHO misleading and wrong. >> >> Bye, >> Simon >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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
