David Gowers wrote:

> I considered that modes might be how you meant to implement it. That is 
> definitely a large change in the way the user would use paint tools, we 
> should get Peter Sikking's input here for sure.

Most users wouldn't normally have to play with those details.
There could be a standard set of brush presets grouped under various 
tags which would contain at least one version of each mode (by default 
for example a fuzzy and a standard circle variant, freely scalable).

Here's a quick and dirty mock-up of what I have in mind:

> And we must make it visually clear that these are really properties of 
> the brush, to avoid user confusion
> (A disclosure triangle would deal with this neatly)

Yes, you're right. I haven't thought about this yet.

> Another thing is that we have actions named like 
> tools-value-[12345]-(increase|decrease), etc which currently control 
> some brush parameters (value-1 is opacity, usually). With your 
> proposition, we should consider whether we need more actions so that the 
> user can do more quick changes by keyboard (for example, I'd like to be 
> able to toggle 'Apply Jitter' using a keyboard shortcut. And if 'Fade' 
> (and fade length) were bindable to keyboard actions, they would be far 
> more usable IMO.

I think that anything that can be varied with pen tablet dynamics (I 
proposed that most numerically variable brush parameters would be) needs 
to have optional keyboard actions too.

> oh, that reminds me, I gave the wrong URL, the correct URL is:
> http://mypaint.intilinux.com

Yes, I eventually figured it out and downloaded the Windows build.

> Definitely, it will get developed more, that way :)



Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to