On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:04 +0200, gg wrote:
[...]
> It seems that there is an implicit assumption in the current behaviour
> that if the image can fit into the display window it absolutely must be
> centred.
The idea that the pixel under the mouse pointer should stay at the same
position on the
The most natural-feeling zoom tools I have used do something similar
to this. Instead of centering on the mouse cursor, they zoom such
that the pixel under the mouse cursor does not move. This makes the
zoom feel very smooth, imho.
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Kurt Pruenner wrote:
> Maybe i
On Monday 18 May 2009 20:46:21 Kurt Pruenner wrote:
> Maybe it's just me, but I would expect the mousewheel zoom to
> center on the mouse cursor while hitting + and - on the keyboard
> should zoom from the center...
This would mean that people with some disabilities are limited by
gimp. The same
Martin Nordholts wrote:
> Yes this is correct. Before we added this logic it was a pain to work
> with the zoom; often when you zoomed out the image ended up completely
> offsetted out in a corner in the image window.
>
> I am completely open to improving zoom however since I also have the
> fe
gg wrote:
> It seems that there is an implicit assumption in the current behaviour
> that if the image can fit into the display window it absolutely must be
> centred.
>
Yes this is correct. Before we added this logic it was a pain to work
with the zoom; often when you zoomed out the image e
> > The effect of this (fixed point of zoom) is that the relation to mouse
> > when doing in&out is preserved.
> >
> > Jernej pointed out that PaintShopPro behaves like I wished for, so
> > they had a reason for this too.
> >
> >
I think this is the main point from a GUI design angle. The GUI sho
On Monday 18 May 2009 09:13:03 Fredrik Alströmer wrote:
> > I realize that the current behaviour has the reason, but also I
> > try find out the way, so users with other workflow could benefit.
>
> It'll probably be very hard to solve for everyone, I guess solving
> for 'most people' (don't try to
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Rob Antonishen wrote:
> Instead of zooming in and out all the time why not vreate a new view
> at the other zoom to have both always available?
So we are back to the old magnifying lens discussion? :)
Alexandre
___
Gimp-
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 15:01, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> On Sunday 17 May 2009 13:08:33 Fredrik Alströmer wrote:
>
>> I don't want to add fuel to the fire,
>
> Nah :-), we are talking not quarreling :-))
Well, in that case... ;)
>> I just wanted to point out
>> that Sven is not alone in his op
On Sunday 17 May 2009 16:40:54 Rob Antonishen wrote:
> Instead of zooming in and out all the time why not vreate a new
> view at the other zoom to have both always available?
Well, I could zoom in and then not zoom out at all, just scroll, but
both those solutions require more work than zooming
Instead of zooming in and out all the time why not vreate a new view
at the other zoom to have both always available?
-Rob A.
On 5/17/09, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> On Sunday 17 May 2009 13:08:33 Fredrik Alströmer wrote:
>
>> I don't want to add fuel to the fire,
>
> Nah :-), we are talking not
On Sunday 17 May 2009 13:08:33 Fredrik Alströmer wrote:
> I don't want to add fuel to the fire,
Nah :-), we are talking not quarreling :-))
> I just wanted to point out
> that Sven is not alone in his opinion.
I realize that the current behaviour has the reason, but also I try
find out the
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 22:10, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> On Friday 15 May 2009 22:02:53 Sven Neumann wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 21:55 +0200, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
>> > On Friday 15 May 2009 21:38:04 Sven Neumann wrote:
>> > > Keeping the pixel under the mouse cursor fixed has the
>> >
On Friday 15 May 2009 22:02:53 Sven Neumann wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 21:55 +0200, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> > On Friday 15 May 2009 21:38:04 Sven Neumann wrote:
> > > Keeping the pixel under the mouse cursor fixed has the
> > > advantage that the behavior for zooming in and out is
> > > co
On Friday, May 15, 2009, 21:38:04, Sven Neumann wrote:
> Keeping the pixel under the mouse cursor fixed has the advantage that
> the behavior for zooming in and out is consistent. If you zoom out too
> far, you can easily zoom back in without loosing the area of interest. I
> think that clearly ou
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 21:55 +0200, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> On Friday 15 May 2009 21:38:04 Sven Neumann wrote:
>
> > Keeping the pixel under the mouse cursor fixed has the advantage
> > that the behavior for zooming in and out is consistent.
>
> Well, it would be consistent if gimp consi
On Friday 15 May 2009 21:38:04 Sven Neumann wrote:
> Keeping the pixel under the mouse cursor fixed has the advantage
> that the behavior for zooming in and out is consistent.
Well, it would be consistent if gimp consistently kept this
pixel-cursor relation. But it is not (gimp 2.6.6). Open any
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 20:20 +0200, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> Currently the image is "glued" to the mouse cursor which I don't find
> any useful -- I would like to see "big picture" (or "more details"),
> I move the mouse anyway.
Keeping the pixel under the mouse cursor fixed has the adva
On Friday 15 May 2009 19:57:39 Sven Neumann wrote:
> > DEFGHIJK|12345|ABC
> > DEFGHIJK|12345|ABC
> >
>
> What is your definition of "focusing on that area"? Focusing on the
> 5 for means having 5 under the mouse pointer.
> Now how can you possibly argue that this is not intuitive and
> useful? I
Hi,
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 15:08 +0200, Maciej Pilichowski wrote:
> DEFGHIJK|12345|ABC
> DEFGHIJK|12345|ABC
>
> letters are off the screen, digits are visible. | denotes edges
>
> Now -- I would like to zoom out on "5" (I would like to focus on that
> area), how do I do?
What is your definiti
On Friday 15 May 2009 09:06:25 Alec Burgess wrote:
> However (I hadn't tried this before) if with zoom-tool you do
> Ctrl+click+drag to define "area of interest" then release AFAICT
> the "area of interest" always remains visible. Possible problem (?)
> - you may find it zooms out "too quickly".
Maciej Pilichowski (bluedz...@wp.pl) wrote (in part) (on 2009-05-14 at
09:08):
> But for zooming out there is no such "cheap" workaround. Image:
>
> DEFGHIJK|12345|ABC
> DEFGHIJK|12345|ABC
>
> letters are off the screen, digits are visible. | denotes edges
>
> Now -- I would like to zoom out on
22 matches
Mail list logo
