On Sat, 2009-12-19 at 08:47 -0500, Joseph Miller wrote:
> I have to work with a lot of website images so I end up doing a lot of
> resizing. I kept running into problems though where I would resize a
> whole set of layers, then find out I made them to large or too small.
> But I wouldn't be able to know this until I had them laid out on the
> image and could visually see the result. Since git Gimp has support
> for layer trees now (woo!) I figured this would be the easiest way to
> implement the feature. I just got this arranged about 20 minutes ago
> so I have not done a whole lot of testing. I also don't really know
> much about Gimp internals. I am looking for comments to my approach.
> Should I be moving in a different direction? I would like to add
> brightness-contrast non-destructive editing next, then maybe some
> color correction.
Use of layer-groups for this is definitely not the right approach. We
want non-destructive editing and actually all of the work that has gone
into porting GIMP over to GEGL has a primary goal and that is
non-destructive editing. However adding this now by abusing a totally
unrelated feature (layer groups) only makes it more difficult to
accomplish this goal. So the net effect of your approach would be that
it takes even longer before GIMP becomes a non-destructive image editor.
So what should be done instead? The way to go is clearly to extend use
of GEGL in GIMP. If the Scale tool and other Scale operations work by
inserting a "scale" node into the graph instead of destructively
converting the image data, then we are almost there. The same should be
done for all color correction tools. Currently they can make use of
GEGL, but they do that in a destructive way because this part of the
code was added before we even had a GEGL projection in GIMP.
I hope that we can motivate you to work on the GEGL graph in GIMP so
that it can not only be used to project the image data, but also to do
some of the image processing.
Gimp-developer mailing list