Joe Eagar wrote:
> Sven Neumann wrote:
>> On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 20:37 -0500, Daniel Falk wrote:
>>> Photoshop has a tool that works like the healing brush except that it
>>> doesn't require a source region to be specified before using the tool.
>>> When there are a lot of quick touch-ups to do, this is very convenient.
>>> Photoshop somehow guesses what it should use as source material and is
>>> often accurate. When it's not accurate, users can undo it, and then
>>> fall back on the healing brush and manually specify that information.
>> Since we don't know how this works in detail, there is not much point in
>> suggesting that we add such a feature.
> Could you explain the reasoning behind this? Such feature requests are
> always a good thing, and listening to them is a sign of a user-centric
> development team. By "listening" to them I don't mean *implementing*
> them, but a steady stream of such ideas can be beneficial.
Suggesting a new feature without specifying how the algorithm behind it
work is pointless because how could the feature then be implemented?
There are way too many other things to use the sparse GIMP developer
resources for than to research details of other peoples feature requests.
Note the difference between not listening to users and rejecting
incomplete feature requests. We appreciate that you think GIMP is worth
spending some on to help improving, but please don't take it personal if
some of your suggestions are considered incomplete.
It would be very appreciated if you took the time to research exactly
how this algorithm is supposed to work.
Gimp-developer mailing list