Summer of Code

Valerie valerie_vk at
Thu Mar 20 10:49:11 CET 2008

Hey there! I don't understand Any of all those coding talks you
are all talking about! :D But in that mumbo jumbo, I think I
understood that you are discussing the possibility of centering
on tool Instances instead of just tools? In that case, yay! First
step to brush collections!

That said, here's an alternate point of view, an interface proposal
from someone who has no idea how the underlying algorithmics work:


At the center of the interface is the obligation to first chose the
"brush type", ie the brush algorithm from the programmer point of
view (airbrush, generic, Chinese ink, watercolor etc).

Most options change depending on that first algorithm chosen,
so I'm tempted say that it should be Fixed, and you chose which
algorithm to work with upon creating a new brush.

Then you chose the shape algorithm, which can be your typical bitmap,
but also predefined algorithms suited to that type of brush (broom
and such for Chinese ink for example).

I'm kind of pro placing the main shape and brush type parameters
into the same panel, since they are what you need to work with
at a glance. They can all be collapsed to save space. In particular,
shapes parameters (X radius, Y radius, angle and the lot, or bristle
properties for specific algorithms) should be modifiable for the most
part from the visual editor/preview anyway. Design to be discussed.

But they could be separated.

Dynamic effects:

The above example is for color effects. The commands only appear
when you click the box, a la Gimp. This avoids clutter.

The Dynamic Effects options change depending on the type of brush
chosen. Watercolor and Chinese ink for example will have "edge
effects" and such instead of normal size fades.


An important part of the interface proposal. Instead of cluttering
the upper toolbar, let the users define what they want up there
themselves! They can also tear away a few sliders to stuff into a
corner or such if they so wish, like in earlier versions of Painter
(well... Painter Classic had free-roaming sliders in any case). This
way the user doesn't have to pop up the huge brush panel each time.

This also means that each preset should have built-in information
on some interface settings.


Another important aspect. These are tool-specific shortcuts. If 
the commands are taken up by "general" shortcuts, then a warning
is issued. This allows users to quickly see what shortcuts are 
available and allows them to define their own very quickly, thus 
improving the work flow. Also, the reason they are tool-specific 
is because different brushes have different parameter. Why have 
a shortcut for "wetness" when using an airbrush when you can 
use the same keys for "rate"?

Good defaults are available in each case, of course.

Hmm, I may have forgotten a few things... There are multiple ideas
stuffed into each screenshot. Of course, the final result will
depend on the rest of you.

Even if some of these ideas get accepted though, I predict hell to
code them. XD It'd be nice to have though.

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

More information about the kimageshop mailing list