[calligra/calligra/2.9] krita/data/paintoppresets: restore broken presets
Timothée Giet
animtim at gmail.com
Sat Feb 28 16:45:47 UTC 2015
The first solution you suggest can be a good temporary workaround, if
someone can make the build rules and create a special folder for
paintoppresets to use for windows build.
Though please consider some people can use it both on windows and linux,
so try to keep presets as consistent as possible accross both sets
(especially I noticed some presets you changed had very different size,
that's not good..).
Also maybe adding "_fast" to the names of presets that have been tweaked
for speed can help make things more clear for everyone, and maybe help
investigate the performance issues on (some) windows system.
Le 28/02/2015 16:56, Scott Petrovic a écrit :
> Does this sum up everything?
> The original issue we are trying to solve here that Windows users are
> complaining about brushes being slow and unresponsive. A solution was
> put into place to modify the brushes to make them responsive and more
> usable. This solution introduced a new issue with Linux users not
> wanting to make this quality compromise. We have two concerns that
> need to be addressed.
>
> 1. Brushes on Windows are slow and unresponsive
> 2. Linux users do not want their brushes changed
>
>
> These are the current solutions that have been presented
> 1. Give Windows and Linux users a separate set of brushes by default
> 2. Include brushes that will work for Linux. And also include brushes
> that work for Windows (add both sets)
> 3. Reduce the amount of existing brushes, and then provider separate
> bundles
>
>
> The cleanest solution seems to be choice 1. This performance issue is
> not going away for Windows. I think the other two solutions create
> complexity for people using Krita. Based off my testing and the
> changes I made while using Windows, the quality does have to degrade
> slightly for the brushes to be usable on Windows. Brushes have to be
> usable though, they cannot remain how they were on Windows.
>
> thoughts?
> Scott
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Timothée Giet <animtim at gmail.com
> <mailto:animtim at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Yes, I prefer very much to add new preset (= different name and
> icons) that are specifically optimized for speed,
> rather than changing existing ones making their result different.
> And using the resource bundle to do that when it's ready is a good
> idea.
>
>
> Le 28/02/2015 14:20, Wolthera a écrit :
>>
>> It was not a 100% revert.
>>
>> However, I am happy we have a resource bundle system that's
>> nearly done, which means we can start subdividing the existing
>> presets into bundles, and then have a pack named
>> default-pack-optimised and default-pack-quality. Then we have
>> optimised delivered with windows, and quality with linux.
>>
>> This is not about just krita being buggy, but also about getting
>> the best experience for both sides. Going forward and improving
>> as much as we can.
>>
>> Op 28 feb. 2015 14:10 schreef "Scott Petrovic"
>> <scottpetrovic at gmail.com <mailto:scottpetrovic at gmail.com>>:
>>
>> Almost 90% of all Krita users are on Windows (Google
>> Analytics tells me this), so everything should really be
>> tested heavily on that OS before we do any big changes that
>> could impact performance. Was this commit just 100% reverts?
>> Some of the original presets were unusable on Windows - which
>> is why there were so many complaints with the 2.9 release. I
>> tested each brush preset on Windows to make sure they were
>> responsive with still achieving the highest quality I could
>> get. The smudge brushes were by far the worst, but some of
>> the pixel brushes were quite sluggish and frustrating to use
>> as well. We cannot ignore the majority of our user base.
>>
>> I think the lesson learned is that there is a big performance
>> difference between Linux and Windows brushes - and we need to
>> be aware of them and test accordingly. There were also
>> additional properties added to the brush engine settings in
>> 2.9, so I am sure that played a role with how they are
>> performing.
>>
>> Having slow default brushes makes the entire application look
>> bad.If there are certain brushes that do not work well on
>> Windows, but 'have' to have a certain quality, it might be
>> best to remove those with the default installation. A
>> separate "enhanced linux" brush pack might need to be
>> available separately for linux users.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Timothée Giet
>> <animtim at gmail.com <mailto:animtim at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I didn't test in 2.9 on windows, but I had occasions to
>> test them on pevious versions and they worked fine, no
>> real difference with linux, and nothing of what I changed
>> since then should made them slower. If some people have
>> new performance issues that must be some regressions, so
>> changing presets is not the best way to fix this.
>>
>> I made some comparative tests to check before/after and
>> restored presets where the quality of the intended line
>> suffer from the changed settings, wether it was different
>> softness, different line continuity, or very different
>> size...
>>
>>
>> Le 28/02/2015 11:37, Boudewijn Rempt a écrit :
>>> Should we have a different set on Windows and on Linux
>>> then? Or did you test these presets on Windows, too?
>>>
>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, Timothée Giet wrote:
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Krita mailing list
> kimageshop at kde.org <mailto:kimageshop at kde.org>
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Krita mailing list
> kimageshop at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20150228/ec635178/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the kimageshop
mailing list