Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
On 09/15/2011 09:50 AM, Richard Gitschlag wrote: > >> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:37:05 -0400 >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics? > >> > >> I've played with 2.7.3 on Windows a little bit. Here are some other > >> ideas for new dynamic outputs: Hue, Saturation, and Value/Luminance > >> > >> Brian Allen Vanderburg II > > Those can already be simulated using the Color dynamic and careful RGB > values, although > as mentioned in bug #572300 the current "Color" dynamic (i.e. low pressure = > FG, high pressure = BG) > is a bit counter-intuitive in 2.6. If I want something more complicated, say I want to use the color output and fade input to paint a gradient stroke, but also want the pressure to adjust the saturation, so lighter pressure would make the stroke more gray and harder pressure would make the stroke more color. How would I do this with the current dynamic? Brian Allen Vanderburg II signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:37:05 -0400 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics? > > I've played with 2.7.3 on Windows a little bit. Here are some other > ideas for new dynamic outputs: Hue, Saturation, and Value/Luminance > > Brian Allen Vanderburg II Those can already be simulated using the Color dynamic and careful RGB values, although as mentioned in bug #572300 the current "Color" dynamic (i.e. low pressure = FG, high pressure = BG) is a bit counter-intuitive in 2.6. -- Stratadrake [email protected] Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
I've played with 2.7.3 on Windows a little bit. Here are some other ideas for new dynamic outputs: Hue, Saturation, and Value/Luminance Brian Allen Vanderburg II signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:32:47 +0300 > Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics? > > > So what are all the dynamics on the plate for 2.8 anyway (compared to 2.6) ? > > Why not grab some 2.7.3 build and try it out? :) There is lots to discover:) > -- > --Alexia *shrugs* preference for stable versions maybe? The only "non-stable" FOSS I run is FontForge and that is by necessity, not choice. -- Stratadrake [email protected] Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Richard Gitschlag wrote: >> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:42:14 +0400 >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics? >> >> Dunno about "Increment", but "Fade" is already in the brush dynamics >> matrix for 2.8. The matrix is currently 7x10, and I strongly suggest >> the team to consider building and selling a customized version of >> monome to control it :) > > Actually I'm probably mistaken on the "incremental" option -- been a long > time since I tried to use it. > > So what are all the dynamics on the plate for 2.8 anyway (compared to 2.6) ? Why not grab some 2.7.3 build and try it out? :) There is lots to discover:) -- --Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 02:42:14 +0400 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics? > > Dunno about "Increment", but "Fade" is already in the brush dynamics > matrix for 2.8. The matrix is currently 7x10, and I strongly suggest > the team to consider building and selling a customized version of > monome to control it :) Actually I'm probably mistaken on the "incremental" option -- been a long time since I tried to use it. So what are all the dynamics on the plate for 2.8 anyway (compared to 2.6) ? -- Stratadrake [email protected] Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] More Brush dynamics?
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Richard Gitschlag wrote: > I recently discovered I've misplaced my Wacom pen stylus -- the tablet > equivalent of losing your car keys. Ouch. > > Anyway, it gave me an idea for GIMP: Can the "Incremental" and "Fade Out" > brush options be incorporated into the Brush Dynamics grid? The options > basically link opacity to stroke length, but it would be nice if we could > link stroke length with other factors like brush hardness or color. (For > example, linking color to stroke length would mimic the effect of a simple > gradient.) Dunno about "Increment", but "Fade" is already in the brush dynamics matrix for 2.8. The matrix is currently 7x10, and I strongly suggest the team to consider building and selling a customized version of monome to control it :) Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
