Martin Nordholts wrote:
> If we define a tip shape to be a dump bitmap/vector graphics, then it
> can be problematic (in terms of software maintainability and cleanness
> in design) to also read dynamics data from tip shape data files.
> Everything depends on how we define the concepts.
I think this is the main problem.
In my opinion the "brush" should either:
- Be *only* the tip shape and nothing else (leaving dynamics, brush
settings, etc, to tool options, and therefore, tool presets).
- Include most, if not all, tool and brush options/settings, define the
tip shape, its behavior, etc, like I proposed a few weeks ago. Brush
presets would work as "tool presets".
Right now we have an unintuitive hybrid: some settings are defined by
tool settings, some by brush settings.
Gimp-developer mailing list