On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Martin Nordholts <ense...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have also thought a bit on how to clean up the concept of brushes, and
> in my mind, we could do it like this:

Ive also thought of this.

> We make a "brush" be just a bitmap/svg/whatever (possibly also an
> animation). Note that a brush would not even have a spacing as the
> current GIMP gbr brushes.

I would call this part "stamp" or "tip". Essentially it would be a
deffinition of the bitmap stamped on the canvas, possibly in form vector

As to removing spacing from the brush... I believe the default value should
come from the stamp(along with the base size for vector shapes), just
because whats sane for one stamp is not sane for another. Its entirely
dependent on the image in question and its intended use. IT can be optional,
but possible to specify. Perhaps in some formats via a use of a custom meta
data field.

> A "brush preset" is a brush + dynamics, and this is actually what the
> user typically picks. If we would have tags for brush presets, we would
> be one step closer to make brush options be part of the brush, so to speak.

I can only agree with this if default spacing is part of the brush. If that
is the case, then yes, it would be great. However, I see little point in
differentiating between brush presets and tool presets in general. Having a
dock for listing tool presets and tagging them just like any other resource
would make things a lot easier in a uniform way for ALL tools.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to