Indeed, they are good examples. For me, the thing is : why these examples ? To give examples doesn't mean not to justify them.
A justification could be the need of the users, if after a study it appears that the color Brush the most relevant to provide by default is a Pepper, I would understand. Unfortunately, I don't think so. I could also totally understand if someone justifies it by saying "it's for historical reason, the Pepper is a symbol for Gimp". Moreover I think I'm not mistaken if I say that a large set of casual users keep using Gimp with the default brush set and don't add custom ones. My opinion would be that the more useful brushes they have, the more they will feel creative. This is why I think Gimp should be shipped with a large set of useful brushes. Steren On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Rob Antonishen <rob.antonis...@gmail.com>wrote: > One reason to keep some image hose brushes in the default set is just > to demonstrate that gimp supports them! I participate in a web forum > for amateur cartography, and one of the most common requests is how to > use tubes with photoshop. Most are extremely impressed that this > capability exists in Gimp. > > -Rob A> > > On 7/21/09, Sven Neumann <s...@gimp.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 18:33 -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote: > > > >> I d'be against the removal of the "vintage" pixmaped brushes. > > > > Why? Tell us a good reason then why we should keep them. > > > > > > Sven >
_______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer