toolbox taxonomy

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Thursday 03 February 2005 11:30, Casper Boemann wrote:

> YES, although "freehand" tool may not be the best word. Freehand is better
> reserved for the guide that isn't there. Paint isn't that much better a
> word since drawing isn't painting (or is it?). But that is the word we use
> internally as in PaintOp. Don't know which is the better, but for the
> toolbox we should use icons anyway.

How about:

A toolbar with 
* a toggle button for selection/canvas
* separator
* a row of exclusive toggles for 'guides' -- freehand, line, ellipse, 
rectangle, magic wand, feather etc. The fillable shapes are duplicated, one 
for empty, one for filled, like in Kolourpaint.

That takes care of the first problem.

Then we need a toolbar for the miscellaneous tools -- zoom, rotate, crop, 
fill.

We might combine all this in one toolbox with separators like Karbon; or keep 
different standard KDE toolbars.

What happens when you select the fill tool depends on what chosen in the list 
of possible fills types, see below.

What happens when you select a 'guide' (that name clashes with the guides you 
can drag from the rulers) depends on what you select from the QToolBox based 
toolbox with drawers. Painting, drawing, chalking, airbrushing or knifing...

There is still an option sheet for the tools, with stuff like opacity, 
composite op etc.

Therrre  will be an option sheet for the other stuff, the paint ops that make 
the difference between brush & pen etc.; here we get airbrush rate etc. If 
the paint op supports it, you can choose a brush shape from the current brush 
box.

> Yes and yes. The reason I included it was you own comment in an earlier
> mail and that fill with no guide could be floodfill, and fill with a rect
> guide could be rectfill and so on. But you are indeed right that it doesn't
> fit nicely in some cases.

> I totally agree, so fill should not be catogorized together with the other
> tools/paintops.

Except that having a drawer with fill types works solves the problem of 
selection between pattern, solid, gradient, autogradient, (autopattern, if we 
get one) so very nicely. We could put this list of stuff in a separate 
docker... We really need something to allow us to drag tabs from docker to 
docker.

> So you agree that the idea of guides (or geometric helpers or whatever we
> call them) are a good idea?

Yes. The naming needs work, though.
>
> >We don't have real brushes yet, just potato stamps in an aliased and
> >anti-aliased variety... It's going to be a challenge to fit real brushes
> > in Krita's current architecture, too :-(.
>
> nice to dream about them though
>

Yes, and they may be closer than we think. We will need something clever to 
use with the Wet & Sticky paint model I'm working on. And even with Krita's 
current architecture it should be relatively easy to provide the same kind of 
brushes that Corel Painter has. 


-- 
Boudewijn Rempt 
http://www.valdyas.org/fading/index.cgi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20050203/a44f0ddf/attachment.pgp