Hi Ulrich, Hi Alic Thanks for the impressive job. After playing with it I have some remarks:
1) Wording of the latest change May I suggest - to rename "drawn mask" by "geometrical blend" - to rename "parametric mask" by "conditional blend" - to rename "combine masks" by "combine blends" The move towards "blend" instead of "mask" avoids to introduce confusion, especially regarding "combine masks", as the purpose of the combo-box is to decide how the two types of blends work together (and as the geometrical combination is done in the mask manager) The use of "conditional" instead of "parametric" makes probably things clearer for our current/past users without introducing confusion for our future users as "conditional" and "parametric" are more or less equivalent. 2) Wording on "mask manager" On the "mask manager", I find the addition of "grp" quite confusing. Having only the name of the module where the masks are active, is probably enough to make the user understand that this is the place where the shapes are combined for the mentioned module. I would then suggest to simply remove "grp". 3) Usability (bug?) On a specific module, clicking on "masks">"add an existing mask" does nothing on my computer... Thanks again, Cheers, Olivier Le 04/05/2013 21:32, Ulrich Pegelow a écrit : > Am 22.04.2013 15:49, schrieb johannes hanika: >> hi, >> >> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 9:50 PM, AlicVB <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi Ulrich. >> First thanks for your comments :) >> >> about the mask line in the module, I agree it's actual position is not >> optimal, but I don't agree with your solution either, because it would >> mean that you have to do a lot of "click" to add a mask : 1- select >> blend to whatever except off, 2- select blendif to mask&... 3- select >> "add new curve" in the mask line 4- draw the curve... >> that said, enabling conditional blending actually require a lot of >> clicks too ;) >> >> i don't think applying a module through a mask is a very common usecase. >> i would think even hardcore fudging fans would like to apply most of >> their initial corrections full-image, until they proceed to local fine >> tuning. >> >> similar is true for the conditional blending feature, so we tried to >> reduce the clutter pressure on our poor users and hid it away to only be >> seen in case you switch blending on. it's really one click on your mouse >> wheel hovering over the blend mode combo box, not all that bad for >> something you don't do all the time for every module. >> > > Hi guys, > > I just merged branch blendmasks into master. The main aim of that > development branch was to keep the module's GUIs lean and make the > logics of blending, masking and conditional blending more tranparent to > the user. > > Quite some changes are involved: > > * there is now just one combobox "blend" that controls if and how > blending and masks are applied: "off" for none of them, "uniformly" for > blending the complete image, "drawn mask" to limit the effect to an area > defined by shape element, "parametric mask" to limit the effect to > pixels defined by pixel value, and "drawn & parametric mask" for a > combination of the two. > > * conditional blending, previously activated by "only, if" is renamed to > "parametric mask". It defines as blend mask by parameters in color space. > > * the "blend mode" combobox was moved down one hierarchical step. It > just defines the algorithm how blending is done - it is no longer used > to activate or disable blending. > > * I took the opportunity to revamp our blend modes. The new blend mode > "normal" does no longer clamp input and output values. That's done as > users of drawn masks - who want to limit the module's effect to certain > regions - else might observe unexpected results. If clamping is desired, > the new blend mode "normal bounded" is at your hand. The previous blend > mode "unbounded" is deprecated. Legacy history stacks are not still > valid: if they use blend modes that are now deprecated, these are still > used but marked accordingly. > > * blend mode "inverse" is deprecated. There is now an easy way to invert > a blend mask. > > * blend mode "difference" was revamped. The old one did not work well in > Lab color space (blue output). The new one for Lab modules generates a > gray level output that reflects the maximum delta in L, a, and b. The > main purpose of that blend mode is to have a quick overview on which > parts of an image the modules has an effect. > > Please give it a try and report issues :) > > Ulrich > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite > It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production > Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. > Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2 > _______________________________________________ > darktable-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2 _______________________________________________ darktable-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-devel
