yahvuu schrieb:
> Hi,
> Daniel Johannsen schrieb:
>> I only like to add, that in the layer group it is the alpha value of the
>> lowest layer in the group
>> which provides the masking effect for the grouped layers above.
>> (And not a layer in the middle or on top of the group.)
> hmm, special-casing the bottom layer seems a bit odd to me. I'd expect
> the layer group mask to be a property of the layer group and that all
> layers within that group have independent transparency of their own.
> Looking at your examples, i assume the photoshop behaviour is convenient
> because you usually start with a layer and subsequently turn that into
> a layer group. Assuming correctly?
> greetings,
> peter
yes, your assumption is right. I start the painting process with layers 
only for shapes and silhouettes.
Then i add a "layer group" with the mask property (or in photoshop-terms 
a group of "clipping mask"-layers)
 to each of the shape-layers. The layers inside the layer group mask define
volume, texture, athmospheric perspective, etc. of the shape they are 
connected to.

So to say, the layer group mask has the property of a transparency 
value. This value is defined
by the alpha-value of the layer the group is assigned to.

Here is a link that shows the photoshop approach quite well:

You are absolutely right, every layer in the layer group should maintain 
their independent transparency,
but in addition inherit the transparency of their layer group mask.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to