Re: [Gimp-developer] Transparency in transform tools
On Sunday 28 September 2008 21:01:16 Guillermo Espertino wrote: > Probably this should be discussed a little bit more. There's a > particular situation where having an opaque original makes very hard to > use a transform tool... My personal annoyance with this occurs when I float a bit of a mostly transparent layer to adjust it that does not vary much in color and try to make it smaller. It can become VERY difficult to see where you are with your transform at any given moment very quick. Sample. Make a blue blot, not uniform in shape. Select and float it. Now make it smaller so it is placed in a manner you like that may be dependent on the layer below or rest of the image. You wont even see the borders of your preview because they are the same color. > If it's possible to directly hide the original, I'd prefer that option > until the GEGL porting of the display code is ready, even knowing that > the transformation proxy isn't very accurate. > I'd like to know how other users feel about this. I personally am in favor of this. It would make using transform tools both easier and more intuitive. -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Transparency in transform tools
> (hiding the original layer during the operation is possible, but > because of the simplicity of the preview rendering, the preview may > look much different that you'd expect.) Probably this should be discussed a little bit more. There's a particular situation where having an opaque original makes very hard to use a transform tool: when you paste a layer that is bigger than the image area and you have to scale it down to a desired size. You simply can't see the background because the opaque original is in front, so you can't apply the transformation with precision. The same applies when you have to rotate an element to match an angle of something that is behind the layer that you want to transform. I can think of a couple more of examples where this situation makes very hard to work. There's a workaround, that is lowering the original layer opacity then transforming, but it's not very handy (you have to do that and then remember to raise the opacity after you apply each transformation). This makes working with transformations quite slow and tedious. If it's possible to directly hide the original, I'd prefer that option until the GEGL porting of the display code is ready, even knowing that the transformation proxy isn't very accurate. I'd like to know how other users feel about this. Gez. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Transparency in transform tools
Hi Guillermo, On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Guillermo Espertino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm testing Gimp 2.5.4 and it's amazing. > I know it's late for a feature request, but I think it's worth to > discuss about the current behavior of the new feature present in the > transform tools: the ability to set the transparency of the layer or > selection being transformed. > I think it would make more sense to apply that transparency to the > original layer instead of the transformed instance. > In most cases, the original occludes the background, and what the user > usually wants is to see the transformed object on the final context. > This situation becomes particularly annoying when scaling down images. > The larger original doesn't let the user see the real background, where > the transformed image will end up. So this new transparency function > would be much more helpful (in my oppinion) for the original, not for > the "target". > Somebody suggested in the IRC channel that the original should simply > dissapear, because the user wants to see the result of the > transformation, not the original. This has already been discussed, it is far from trivial to implement, mainly because the preview must be drawn directly on the canvas. When the display code is ported to GEGL, this may become practical. (hiding the original layer during the operation is possible, but because of the simplicity of the preview rendering, the preview may look much different that you'd expect.) > I think that there are lots of situations where having a reference of > the original, un-transformed image would be very useful, but not that > useful if having it doesn't let me see the background. > So, what do you think about applying the transparency to the original > insteado of applying it to the transformed image? > > Gez. > David -- Everything has reasons. Nothing has justification. Ĉio havas kialojn; Neniaĵo havas pravigeron. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
