My opinion about that is the same as shirakawa if we want to do photography
retouch and "superexact" works like these, but artisticaly i would prefer
something like Martin says. It is more useful for the eye, if we want to
make an stroke fast and not acuratly but in the aprox right place.the old
method requieres user imagination to preview in his mind what will happen...
but i have to say that i don´t use this "brush outline feature" becouse it
makes my gimp sloooooower with complex outlines.So if somebody has the
solution for this... i am listening.
2009/8/30 SHIRAKAWA Akira <shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com>
> Martin Nordholts wrote:
> > I think the current brush outline for fuzzy brushes is too big. The
> > attached patch improves the brush outline for fuzzy brushes (see
> > screenshot ). If using a higher threshold doesn't result in any
> > outline at all, the patch fallbacks to the old brush outline so that a
> > brush outline always is shown even if the brush only has low-intensity
> > values.
> In my opinion the idea of the brush outline is that it represents its
> total area of effect, or in other words, the area where pixels will be
> affected in a way or another while drawing. The brush outline for fuzzy
> brushes (assuming dynamics aren't applied) *looks* too big, but it
> actually isn't. This is most evident by drawing a few strokes with the
> fuzzy brush on a transparent layer and then adjusting the alpha level
> channel on Colors>Levels to coordinates (0;255) .
> A more useful patch (in my opinion) for brush outlines would be making
> them change together with brush dynamics (even if the user isn't
> actually drawing, just moving the cursor on the drawing area) if they
> are enabled. This could be useful in many ways, but I have the
> impression it would lead to performance issues.
> SHIRAKAWA Akira
> Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer mailing list