> 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?
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
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