On Tue, 25 May 2010 20:06:48 -0500
Dieki N <dieki.ubu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Dieki N <dieki.ubu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I've created a patch to improve the behavior of brush size
> > increase\decrease keyboard shortcuts, particularly at small sizes
> > and large sizes. The old behavior increased\decreased the brush
> > size by a fixed value (0.10), which worked fine at medium sizes,
> > and reasonably well at large sizes (since you could hold down the
> > keyboard shortcut to get a lot of change), but completely broke
> > down at sizes underneath 0.20, since you tended to have two
> > options; too big or too small. (Or, when under 0.10, none at all!)
> >
> > This patch sets the increment according to the following rules:
> >
> > If <brush size> is greater than 2, it increments by 0.20.
> > If <brush size> is less than 2 but greater than 0.50, it increments
> > by 0.10.
> > If <brush size> is less than 0.50 but greater than 0.10, it
> > increments by 0.05.
> > If <brush size> is less than 0.10, it increments by 0.01.
> >
> > I've tested this in my own use over the last couple weeks, and it
> > seems most helpful, particularly when masking fine details. This
> > patch is against Master.



Well I tried that patch and like it. I also thought that the scaling
was too aggressive and that patch seems to settle it down nicely.


Thanks


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

Reply via email to