On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Michael Grosberg
<grosberg.mich...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the spacing calculation does not take into effect the aspect ratio
> correctly, and acts as if the longest axis is the base length from which 
> spacing
> is derived, while it should be, I believe, the short axis that affects the
> spacing.
this is a long standing issue, that I do plan to look into at some
point. There are some complications I believe, relating to knowing the
effect that dynamics are going to have on shape and size of the brush.
The same issue manifests with rotation.

> Also, The aspect ratio slider is not very intuitive - would it be possible
> to have 0 as the default state (height = width), with, say negative numbers
> for scaling height and positive for scaling width? I know it makes no sense
> mathematically, but visually it would help to have the slider centered for
> zero distortion and have the same length on either side for changing the 
> aspect
> ratio.
This change is already commited to git. Has been for a week or so, the
repository must be  be behind a bit.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to