hi,

peter sikking wrote:
> - 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'.

on the other hand, showing the brush stamp gives a good preview of drawing.
This can be taken to the extreme by setting 'idle' opacity to 100%.
But then this only makes sense for drawing in normal mode on the top layer.
And becomes totally useless for the dodge/burn tool.


Adding contrast needs some thought -- at least the standard XOR 0x7FFF7F
doesn't perform well using simple blending according to brush stamp alpha:
http://yahvuu.wordpress.com/2009/08/30/scratch-trash/

somebody got ideas for better algorithms?


> - 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.

i'd love to indicate hardness somehow. Seems to me what's interesting is not so
much the exact border of, say 25% opacity, but rather a hint about how wide the
feathering is.



greetings,
peter

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Reply via email to