Re: Layers, dialogs and other bits of love on Valentines Day
Hi, Emmanuel Mwangi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyways, all that is far off. I was wondering you could just have nested layers in this next version of Gimp. It doesn't even have to have all the strange but, cool stuff that tigert was talking about but, even just being able to organize your layers and having the ability to group them hierachially and turn a group's visiblity on and off, and being able to move a layer from one group to the next, etc. I have very strong doubts that allowing layer trees in Gimp-1.4 would mean you'd get layer trees earlier than if you'd wait for Gimp-2.0. In fact I believe it would only mean that you wouldn't see a stable Gimp-1.4 before 2003. The problem implementing all this in the current code tree is that the current code is a mess. The layers dialog is especially messy. So what we will do is clean up that mess first, then port to GTK+-2.0, then release 1.4, then take all the nice new code, add GEGL and PUPUS and release Gimp-2.0 shortly after. On a side note, is there any work being done on the layers dialog? Yes, all dialogs and everything else is under heavy development. Salut, Sven
testers needed for bugs #22567 and #50867
It looks like some strange things are happening in the Gimp (any version since 1.1.x) if you create an image of size 1x63 or similar sizes. Some of these effects (related to the tile management, IIRC) had been discussed on this list in the past, but the strange thing is that some people (Seth, Marc) do not seem to be affected by #22567 while others get some strange errors with exactly the same version of the Gimp. This is apparently independent of the operating system, X display or window manager used because I could reproduce #22567 on different platforms. Please read the comments on the following pages and see if you can add any useful information. If you can find two configurations (software versions, compilation options, environment variables, window manager, or some other settings) in which the bugs appear or do not appear, that would probably help to track down the source of the problems. I already tried to include as much information as I could find in these bug reports: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22567 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50867 Feel free to add your own comments to these bug reports... Bug #22567 generates a GTK+ warning when you undo a resize. Bug #50867 can apparently crash 1.3.0 if you run some plug-ins (with version 1.2.1 it generates many GTK+ warnings but otherwise it works). -Raphael
RE: Layers, dialogs and other bits of love on Valentines Day
Hi, Emmanuel Mwangi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Anyways, all that is far off. I was wondering you could just have nested layers in this next version of Gimp. It doesn't even have to have all the strange but, cool stuff that tigert was talking about but, even just being able to organize your layers and having the ability to group them hierachially and turn a group's visiblity on and off, and being able to move a layer from one group to the next, etc. I have very strong doubts that allowing layer trees in Gimp-1.4 would mean you'd get layer trees earlier than if you'd wait for Gimp-2.0. In fact I believe it would only mean that you wouldn't see a stable Gimp-1.4 before 2003. Maybe I wasn't clear. I didn't mean layering should change in any way than it does now (except maybe adding Photoshop style color dodge ;) but, just the representation of it should. The way the layers stack isn't the change that I was thinking about but rather, the way they are represented in the dialog. Currently: V-Visibility V-Layer 1 V-Layer 2 V-Layer 3 V-Layer 4 V-Layer 5 One can turn Visibility off for one dialog. V-Layer 1 -Layer 2 V-Layer 3 V-Layer 4 V-Layer 5 Now with the layers: V-Layer 1 - V-Group L2-4 V-Layer 2 V-Layer 3 V-Layer 4 V-Layer 5 They are stacked in the same order as before. But, you can: V-Layer 1 + V-Group L2-4 V-Layer 5 Which, in reality it is no different than: V-Layer 1 V-Layer 2 V-Layer 3 V-Layer 4 V-Layer 5 Now when we turn a group of layers off: V-Layer 1 - -Group L2-4 V-Layer 5 In reality is: V-Layer 1 - -Group L2-4 -Layer 2 -Layer 3 -Layer 4 V-Layer 5 The layer object Group L2-4 is a parent to Layers 2-4 but, isn't really a layer itself (i.e. doesn't have pixmap data) but, a container of layers. Layers 2-4 are children to GroupL2-4 and inherit the visibility of the parent. And this is just crude visibily, not the 0-100% slider scale visibilty, just seen or unseen. The layers keep their individual slider scale of 0-100% visiblity. The layers are linear just like before but, now it's the organization that has changed. This is terribly useful for images that have 20, 30 even 50-100 layers; I've seen people that use that many. Not to patronize your skills but, that doesn't seem as hard. Just a simple tree list view. Though it would be nice to have the ability to nest groups, just having groups would be a great addition. Not really the hyper complex relational layers for Gimp 2.0. And the code can later be modified to make a variation of Group/Container layer into a masking layer for a group of children layers. This would be more complex and thus be in Gimp 2.0 That being said, I wish I could code better but, I'm in my second semester of Programming here at Biola (not exactly known for it's Comp. Sci. Dept) and I would like, no love to be able to send a patch for this. I've looked at the Gimp code before. Even for a novice like me, it is apparent how hairy that beast is. Since I can't code, I'd be happy to write docs. I'm busy but, by the time you guys are done (hopefully in the summer) I could start writing documentation. I'm sorry if this has been redundant but, I just want to be clear. The problem implementing all this in the current code tree is that the current code is a mess. The layers dialog is especially messy. So what we will do is clean up that mess first, then port to GTK+-2.0, then release 1.4, then take all the nice new code, add GEGL and PUPUS and release Gimp-2.0 shortly after. For Gimp 2.0, how much of it will be Bonoboized? _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Layers, dialogs and other bits of love on Valentines Day
Hi, "gimptek DESIGNS" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Maybe I wasn't clear. I didn't mean layering should change in any way than it does now (except maybe adding Photoshop style color dodge ;) but, just the representation of it should. The way the layers stack isn't the change that I was thinking about but rather, the way they are represented in the dialog. Your ideas are worth considering after the preview stuff has been generalized and we start to rewrite the layers dialog (which is something we definitely want to do for gimp-1.4). For Gimp 2.0, how much of it will be Bonoboized? We have not yet decided if we want to bonoboize something at all, but mostly due to the fact that noone I talked to so far could explain what this would mean in particular. Salut, Sven
Re: RUN_WITH_LAST_VALUES
Robert L Krawitz said... | |Under what circumstances is RUN_WITH_LAST_VALUES intended to be used? |Is it something I should be particularly concerned with in the print |plugin, or would dropping it be reasonable? It's for when you want to rerun a plugin withoout having to mess with the values. For instance, Filter - repeat last. Does it make sense for printing I don't know. Where's the printing equivalent of Gilter-Repeat Last ? -Miles
