On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 08:26:59AM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:14 -0700, Valerie wrote:
> > I guess we have drastically different usages of brushes though.
> > I NEVER use a "brush of exactly 17 pixels". In fact, a brush of
> > "exactly 17 pixels" is pretty much useless to me. Most people
> > go by a visual cue instead of specific values, and you can't
> > see the exact size of the brushes in the list in the first place.
> Exactly, you need a visual cue. That's why I think it's important to
> offer a set of differently sized brushes in the brushes list. So that
> people can pick a brush of about the right size. But perhaps we needd to
> rethink the user interface for brush selection and try to come up with a
> solution that works better?
I have a weird obsession. I work with images that are larger than what
most other people work with.
So I don't need a 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, or 19 pixel fuzzy
circle, but I need one that is around 30 pixels wide. Or 50.
So, it's nice to have the visual cue, but because there is a simple
enumeration, the one I need is never there.
** [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 **
** Delftechpark 26 2628 XH Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
Q: It doesn't work. A: Look buddy, doesn't work is an ambiguous statement.
Does it sit on the couch all day? Is it unemployed? Please be specific!
Define 'it' and what it isn't doing. --------- Adapted from lxrbot FAQ
Gimp-developer mailing list