On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 4:46 AM, Souichi TAKASHIGE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, I'm currently working on another program, so I have not
> maintained the patch any longer.
> GIMP will be fully non-destructive editor in the future, but I think
> that is not a good news for users who use GIMP as a painting tool.
> Non-destructive editing is convenient in some situations, but a lot of
> brush painting processes don't need to be non-destructive, and making
> all of them non-destructive is a waste of time and resources.
They do not need to be made fully non-destructive, for the paint core
I have been experimenting with on top of GEGL I have both a
destructive and a non destructive version. The difference between them
being that the destructive one continuously replaces the contents of a
GeglBuffer instead of building a graph. Making things non-destructive
doesn't necessarily imply additional work when creating brush painting
processes if the infrastructure to do so exists. (I've mainly
experimented with the destructive version thus
far when I've had time since it is significantly faster than the
non-destructive one which depends on better automatic cache purging to
be more efficient.
> GEGL and GIMP are great work of cource, it is very powerful photo
> retouching tool. But it's not good for painting images from scratch
> since it lacks a lot of features specialized for painters (like view
> rotation and flipping.)
These are features that might easily be added on top of a GEGL based,
both destructive and non-destructive paint core. At least if using
hardware acceleration like the ClutterGegl view widget to display the
final composite. At GUADEC this year I showed a mini painting app
embedded in a presentation tool where I could freely rotate the GEGL
paint demo and paint at it at any angle.
> I think being general purpose program is a waste of time: code size
> will grow constantly and the architecture will be more and more
> complex. No one can maintain it. So GIMP should focus on the photo
> retouching, and other programs like Artweaver, Gogh, and MyPaint
> should focus on painting features.
For some things, like natural media simulation using cellular automata
like approaches I tend to agree, this is also one of the few types of
simulations that I think would be difficult to make work in a
non-desctructive fashion. For other types of user empowering painting
features I do think they can belong in GIMP as well, or perhaps in
other applications built on top of GEGL.
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
-- William Gibson
Gimp-developer mailing list