* Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-08-08 07:23]:
> > 
> and what does this get you?  you only need to do this if you need
> the extra space on the layer.

Unfortunately I discovered the float layer option _before_ I
discovered the move tool, so I was trying to float everything that I
needed to move.  Combined with not knowing about the layer boundary, it
was a disaster.

Now that I've come upon the move command, I actually prefer to have
conservative layer borders and use the move tool.  I have abandoned
the float tool, but that's not to say that I won't find a use for it

> i suggest that you want to use Photoshop; a not as complex graphics
> app that has been built for people who cannot understand (or hope to
> learn to understand) different sizes of layers.

Yes, photoshop from what I understand is much better for users first
encountering this type of tool, because it requires very little
understanding.  They can accomplish layer manipulation w/out needing
to study some of the esoteric details.

Gimp obviously requires people to grasp this foreign concept.  This
does not mean they "cannot understand," as you put it, but that they
will not gain an adequate understanding of this from the gui
interface.  Until the GUI accommodates, this understanding is acquired
via explanation.

> nothing that a little experience would fix.  the gimp is not
> photoshop so it is a mistake to approach using it as if it is.

As far as I'm concerned, Gimp is Photoshop, simply because I'm not
doing anything complex enough to go beyond the basic functionality
that's offered in both packages.  Furthermore, I would hope to see
Gimp get to a point where it can replace Photoshop.  As it is now, it
seems Photoshop is a superset of Gimp.

> one thing that i do not understand is the need for floating layers.
> i dont think that this term is being used properly here.  is there
> any reason that there needs to be the extra step to make pasting
> directly to an existing layer easier?  it is so rare that i paste
> anything to an existing layer.  it makes more sense to me to make
> the extra step for those rare occasions that you do paste right to
> an existing layer.

I can see how floating a layer could be useful in some rare instances,
but now that I've switched to moving layers as opposed to objects on
layers, I could also live without the floating capability.

If a majority of users agree that the floating capability is not very
useful, maybe a good approach would be to remove it from the standard
builds, and require users to proactively compile that option in if
they want it.
Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to