Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
Hi,
"Branko Collin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The Magic Wand is not the only way to make a selection. I agree it
> sounds logical that one would want to stroke or fill a wand selection
> completely, but I can think of uses for a threshold fill with a
> rectangular or elliptical selection.
you can intersect a magic wand selection with an existing selection
by pressing Ctrl-Shift.
> BTW, I checked out how my GIMP (Win32) deals with changing the
> content of dialogs: when having two image windows open plus the
> layers dialog ("Layers, Channels & Paths"), and then switch between
> image windows, the contents of the latter does not change until I
> click in the new image window. Would it be possible to make it so
> that the contents of such dialogs change when you only activate the
> new image window? Or is this just a Windows GTK+ thing?
The active image is only switched if you perform an action in the
image. Pressing Space counts as an action here. This behaviour is
intentional and was discussed here before.
Salut, Sven
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
On 5 Jun 2001, at 16:10, Ralf Engels wrote:
[discussion so far]
> 1. Most of the user use the magic wand to select and either ,
> or drag and drop or the bucket tool to fill a region. They normaly
> don't use the threshold.
The Magic Wand is not the only way to make a selection. I agree it
sounds logical that one would want to stroke or fill a wand selection
completely, but I can think of uses for a threshold fill with a
rectangular or elliptical selection.
Why, BTW, is the Bucket Fill called Bucket Fill, why not just Fill? I
would like to know this both to be able to participate better in this
discussion, and because it would help me better my Dutch translation
of the GIMP.
> 2. The user interface is not clear. I didn't know that you can drag
> and drop to a selection (could someone add this to the "did you know"
> file?).
What is the Did you know file?
The Tips file (gimp_tips.txt) has the following to say:
: You can drag and drop many things in the GIMP. For
: example, dragging a color from the toolbox or from a
: color palette and dropping it into an image will fill the
: current image or selection with that color.
The use of 'many' rather than listing all the possibilities would
suggest to me that I am encouraged here to experiment with this
feature (which I have tried, BTW, but it does not seem to work under
Windows 98). If anywhere, a comprehensive list of all that can be
dragged and all the things it can be dropped in should be in the
manual.
> A threshold with a selection does not make sense. That you can
> fill everything by setting the threshold to 255 is only for advanced
> users.
Well, I contend that if the UI tells you that you are using a
threshold, sense is pretty much out of the window. This is because
even if you never thought of using a threshold within a selection
yourself, you can imagine that that would be possible.
BTW, I checked out how my GIMP (Win32) deals with changing the
content of dialogs: when having two image windows open plus the
layers dialog ("Layers, Channels & Paths"), and then switch between
image windows, the contents of the latter does not change until I
click in the new image window. Would it be possible to make it so
that the contents of such dialogs change when you only activate the
new image window? Or is this just a Windows GTK+ thing?
> 3. The bucket fill does not behave like expected. With an active
> selection the fill should fill a region (as determined by the
> threshold) but limited to the selection.
This sounds to be contrary to what you sum up under 1.
> 4. Too many tools only confuse the user.
Too many anything confuse the user. However, if I had to choose
between a second fill tool or an extra option in the Fill dialog, I
(intuitively) would choose for the latter.
[Ralf's conclusions]
> Drag and drop is a good thing. If we could only use it more often.
> (How about a file icon where you can draw pictures in and out).
This is useful, and I already use it, of course. You can drop icons
of image files from any standard Windows application onto the GIMP,
and it will open automatically. After the list of recently opened
documents this is probably my second favorite way of opening image
files.
> We don't want to sacrifice a tool (either the gradient fill or the
> bucket fill) because other users (from photoshop) know them and would
> miss them. But how about sacrificing the menu entries "fill with
> foreground color".
Why?
> We need to give more clues to the user how to use the features.
> How about this threshold fill bar:
>
> 1255
> |=+===|
>(fill all)
I think there are two issues to be looked at here (if I may digress a
little further).
1) Do we need the numbering?
2) If we use words to indicates the threshold leverl, what words do
we use?
fill
strict all
|=+===|
could work too.
> The most important point:
> We have no one to solve such problems.
> If there is a bug, or any other programming issue, everyone could say
> wrong or right and most of the people will agree. With the UI there is
> no such simple solution. We need someone to solve such problems. We
> need a consistent UI . Should we elect such a person? Should we let a
> poll on the web-page solve the UI problems?
The thing with UIs is that there are only very few people who really
understand how humans interact with computers. And I hate to say it,
but when it comes to graphical UIs, these people do not seem to work
in the free software world. (Textual UIs are a different thing of
course: it would be hard to contend that Unixes have by far the best
text-based UIs around.)
> If you should elect me (I hope not), my opinion is that a UI should be
> fast and small. Things you do often should be fast to do, things you
> do seldom should be possible. Why do we need two or three tools to
> fill a region? Only because other programs have that much tools? I say
> no. One t
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 04:10:58PM +0200, Ralf Engels wrote: > Why do we need two or three tools to fill a region? Only because other > programs have that much tools? > I say no. One tool should be sufficient. "There is more than one way to do it." Nick. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
Hello, I think I should summ up the discussion to this point: 1. Most of the user use the magic wand to select and either , or drag and drop or the bucket tool to fill a region. They normaly don't use the threshold. 2. The user interface is not clear. I didn't know that you can drag and drop to a selection (could someone add this to the "did you know" file?). A threshold with a selection does not make sense. That you can fill everything by setting the threshold to 255 is only for advanced users. 3. The bucket fill does not behave like expected. With a active selection the fill should fill a region (as determined by the threshold) but limited to the selection. 4. Too many tools only confuse the user. 5. No one want's to change a UI. My opinions: Drag and drop is a good thing. If we could only use it more often. (How about a file icon where you can draw pictures in and out). We don't want to sacrifice a tool (either the gradient fill or the bucket fill) because other users (from photoshop) know them and would miss them. But how about sacrificing the menu entries "fill with foreground color". We need to give more clues to the user how to use the features. How about this threshold fill bar: 1 255 |=+===| (fill all) The most important point: We have no one to solve such problems. If there is a bug, or any other programming issue, everyone could say wrong or right and most of the people will agree. With the UI there is no such simple solution. We need someone to solve such problems. We need a consistent UI . Should we elect such a person? Should we let a poll on the web-page solve the UI problems? If you should elect me (I hope not), my opinion is that a UI should be fast and small. Things you do often should be fast to do, things you do seldom should be possible. Why do we need two or three tools to fill a region? Only because other programs have that much tools? I say no. One tool should be sufficient. Ralf
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
On 1 Jun 2001, at 8:14, Seth Burgess wrote: Branko: > > If you guys decide to program a Bucket Fill > > function that always fills the whole > > selection, then the interface should mirror > > this: once a user has made a selection and then > > doubleclicks on the Bucket Fill icon to > > conjure up the Bucket Fill dialog, the threshold > > should be put to maximum (255) and grayed out. > > Thats only accurate for the one image though :( > > > I consider it to be a bug that there is a > > discrepancy between what the program interface > > (in the shape of the Bucket Fill dialog) tells > > me and what the program actually does. > > In a case for more than one mode of image and only one > tool, this will unfortunately always be the case. Still, in a sequence of actions as I described (select --> Bucket Fill dialog --> bucket fill) visual feedback will at least give me a hint that something special is going on. A better thing might be putting something in a (the) status bar of the image window, but I do not want to propose cluttering up that window. > > Second, I feel that (in the light of User Interface > > rule #1 that says > > Users often don't know whats best - they just know if > something is easy to use. And often that is the best. > Rules were made to be broken. It takes lots of thought > and planning to make that happen. We shouldn't be > afraid of offending users by making changes - just be sure > we're moving in the right direction. That is why I said 'unless'. However, if no-one can fill in the unless, the rule applies. -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
> If you guys decide to program a Bucket Fill > function that > always fills the whole selection, then the interface > should mirror > this: once a user has made a selection and then > doubleclicks on the > Bucket Fill icon to conjure up the Bucket Fill > dialog, the threshold > should be put to maximum (255) and grayed out. Thats only accurate for the one image though :( > I consider it to be a bug that there is a > discrepancy between what > the program interface (in the shape of the Bucket > Fill dialog) tells > me and what the program actually does. In a case for more than one mode of image and only one tool, this will unfortunately always be the case. > Second, I feel that (in the light of User Interface > rule #1 that says Rules were made to be broken. Users often don't know whats best - they just know if something is easy to use. It takes lots of thought and planning to make that happen. We shouldn't be afraid of offending users by making changes - just be sure we're moving in the right direction. Seth __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
On 1 Jun 2001, at 13:51, Sven Neumann wrote: > Lourens Veen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hmm, I use the bucket fill all the time, both for patterns and > > filling selections. If I want to fill a region with a similar > > colour with another one I usually select it with the magic > > wand and then bucket fill. It's easier to see how far you'll > > get that way. As far as I'm concerned the threshold > > can disappear, making it default to always fill the > > entire selection (or the entire image if there is no > > selection). Magic wand can do the selecting. > > this sounds reasonable to me. On the other hand, this would > render the bucket fill tool almost useless since you can do > the color and pattern fill much easier using DND. The sole > advantage of the Bucket Fill tools is the threshold > functionality and the fact that the possibility to fill using > DND is not obvious. > > Any other opinions on this subject? I thought you'd never ask. ;-) First, the Bucket Fill dialog only mentions Threshold as an option to decide how mich should be filled. This would suggest that a threshold is being used all the time. Filling a selection defies the interface here. If you guys decide to program a Bucket Fill function that always fills the whole selection, then the interface should mirror this: once a user has made a selection and then doubleclicks on the Bucket Fill icon to conjure up the Bucket Fill dialog, the threshold should be put to maximum (255) and grayed out. This should make it immediately clear to the user that (s)he is now working in a special mode. If they like, users can then decide to look up in the manual what that special mode means. I consider it to be a bug that there is a discrepancy between what the program interface (in the shape of the Bucket Fill dialog) tells me and what the program actually does. Second, I feel that (in the light of User Interface rule #1 that says never to break an existing user expectation or experience), unless more than 90 % of the current and new GIMP users have never used another raster graphics editor before, the GIMP should behave in this respect like most of the other 'competing' tools, UNLESS there is an extremely good reason to do otherwise. I personally cannot think of such a reason, but then again, I am not a graphics artist, so maybe someone else can name some such reasons. -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Bucket fill, Fill with foreground and gradient
Hi, Ralf Engels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I had some problems with the following operations: > > Fill a selection with a pattern. > Lighting a selection up. > > The above operations are possible with the bucket fill, but the bucket > makes it's own selection. Hmm??? Of course Bucket Fill uses an existing selection! > bucket-fill does not make a selection that you can work with. it's not supposed to create selections. > fill with foreground/background has good shortcuts (ctrl ./,) but you > can't set a mode or transparency. it might make sense to make those two use the Bucket Fill settings. The Bucket Fill settings are used when filling using drag-n-drop so this can be considered an unconsistency. > gradient fill can fill with gradients but not with one color or > with a pattern. it's Gradient Fill after all > The first thing to do is add a "fill with color" and "fill with pattern" > option to the gradient fill. > Then we can think about removing the bucket-fill (I don't use it). the Gradient Fill UI is already cluttered enough. We shouldn't add anything not gradient related there. > The above is only a proposition and free for discusion, but I can > implement it if you like. I don't see your point at all since, as I already said, the Bucket Fill tool works just fine with existing selections. Salut, Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
