(peter) yahvuu wrote:
>>>> what about printing a semi transparent copy of the actual brush
>>>> on the
>>>> canvas?
>>> exactly what I thought.
>>
>> Even though I think the patch made the brush outline better for
>> fuzzy brushes, it is still not without flaws. Let's ignore the
>> patch and aim for the above instead
>
> i guess what works best is to display the brush outline while
> drawing and to use the brush stamp when idling.
>
>
> If you want to test-drive the look and feel, here's a flash applet
> featuring various outline designs:
> http://sites.google.com/site/yahvuu/stuff/brushtester-web.lzx.swf8.swf?attredirects=0
I tried that, and although I would not call that exactly a solution,
it did help to observe some things:
- it is fantastic to see a fuzzy/grunge brush as a real
"copy of the actual brush" when one is not painting, but it has to
_contrast_ with what is under it or else it just disappears. When it
contrasts (some X-OR variation, or so) I think it should not be semi
transparent anymore, just exactly reflect the brush alpha value for
each of its 'pixels'.
- that really opens up what (dynamic) paint parameters should be
reflected by the brush when not painting: looks like brush geometry
(brush, scale, aspect ratio, angle) yes, hardness: maybe, rest
(opacity, spacing, jitter, color(gradient)) no.
- when painting, first I feel that this outline is a lousy
representative
for a brush. next I notice that getting the 'brush' out of the way
and
showing the immediate paint result rules. so now I am thinking:
what about no outline at all and just a cross-hair for mouse position
when the mouse is down?
--ps
founder + principal interaction architect
man + machine interface works
http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
