On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 08:47 -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
> What do you think would be a reasonable largest size multiplier
> (as opposed to actual brush size)? The current value is 1000.0 -
> in the previous version it was 10.0.
I used to patch GIMP to set the max _size) 1000 because the built-in
values were really really tiny when working on 2400dpi print images. I
didn't usually need a brush bigger than quarter of an inch for what I
was doing. But I loved the logarithmic controls.
> Maybe, simply having the largest brush size as a value in preferences
> could make up for all use cases.
An input device preference to say, "behaves logarithmically" might work.
The edit/Input Devices dialogue has a place for a "curve" that might
work for this, although I can't test it because it says "this device has
no curve" for me even for my USB mouse which is quite rounded actually.
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
Co-author, 5th edition of "Beginning XML", Wrox, July 2012
gimp-user-list mailing list