"Jozsef Mak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in part:

> To begin with, I would do away with all transformation dialog boxes
> shear, rotation and so on). This is because most of the time, the data
> displayed in these dialog boxes I have little use. Most of the time I
> transform objects interactively. This is how things operate in actual work
> environment as well. (You have almost done the project when the dumb
> comes in the office and says, hey, I want that tree on the left smaller.
> Then you select the tree and hit the scale icon and start scaling; then
> client behind your back says, more., even more., still too large. and you
> keep scaling till the client says ok. There are no width and height sizes
> aspect ratio involved in this process; you just scale interactively by
> feeling out the proper size. This is the same with other transformation
> tools as well.) Therefore, what I would like to do is just click inside
> transformation box border or hit the enter key to confirm the changes. I
> would make one transformation box, though, where all numeric data could be
> inputted in the rare occasion I need them.

I *completely* disagree with Jozsef regarding elimination of the
transformation dialogues that allow numeric input.  While these dialog boxes
may not be very useful in Jozsef's workflow, they are *extremely* useful in
mine, where graphics objects and images must be sized to exact numeric
specifications, not according to how they "look".  In fact the gimp would be
almost completely useless for my purposes without these dialogs.  Whether
Jozsef's suggestion of a single transformation box could be practical for
all of these, I can't say.


Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to