On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 13:34 +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
> Use of image hose for brush transformation is abuse that hopefully is
> no longer needed. They are useful ho ever for complex animated brushes
> and as such should remain to be supported. I myself have made for
> example a hose brush that creates weaving lines. Another use is grass
> and fur brushes that need random and varying shaped stamps. All very
> valid and common usecases.
Do we need the full complexity of the current image hoses for this?
Looks like a simple linear series of brushes could be sufficient.
> I have been thinking about SVG as direct brush format and I think that
> using specifically named meta data fields for the SVG should be
> enough. I think its important to allow the use of stock inkscape to
> create such brushes.
We can't depend on Inkscape to add the GIMP-specific data. So it looks
like the main job of this project would be to add a user interface to
GIMP that allows to import SVG files and saves them with additional data
as GIMP vector brushes in the GIMP brush folder.
It will also be tricky to read this data back when loading the SVG
brush. As far as I can see, librsvg doesn't provide any hooks for
application-specific data in the SVG file. We might have to parse the
file twice, but I guess that's OK. We would just mmap the brush file and
pass it through a GimpXmlParser for the metadata and to
rsvg_handle_new_from_data() to get the SVG rendered.
> For multiple stamps in one file layers should be used just like for
> image hoses now in gimp.
SVG doesn't have a concept of layers. It does support animation, but
animation in SVG is rather complex and not well suited for our needs.
Gimp-developer mailing list