Maintenance of generator plugins...

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> Ok, so I started work on the plasma generator (finally)... so far it's
> just a copy of, er, "example", but I got far enough in the template-ish
> changes to realize a few snags.
>
> First (dumb one), can I rename "example" to "solid"? (This involves
> changing the strings in .desktop which aren't wholly accurate right now;
> what's the i18n-procedure there, do I delete the now-invalid translations?)

Yes, just fix the strings and delete existing translations in the .desktop 
files.

> Second... the category right now for the solid-color generator is
> "random", which is probably non-optimal. But... I'm not sure what the
> best category names would be, so I'd like to solicit suggestions.

It used to be random noise, but I didn't have time to implement that properly, 
hence the wrong category.

> So far, my vision for generators is to have at least the following:
>
> - solid color, gradient
> - noise (literally, random pixels), perlin, plasma (similar to perlin)
> - flame (apophysis is one IFS flame implementation, but I'll be adding
> other non-IFS, maybe-not-fractal equations like de Jong)
> - lens flare, supernova (from GIMP)
> - any other traditional filters that are not input-dependent
>
> "Basic" is an obvious candidate. Most of the others are often grouped
> under "Render" in plug-in menus, so something more fine-grained is
> perhaps called for. "Noise" would be good, except is plasma "noise" or a
> fractal? What would "flame" be (since it might not be technically a
> "Fractal")?
>
> Maybe use "Basic", "Render" (all noises and flame), "Effects" (flare,
> supernova), i.e. reserve "Render" for processes that have more math than
> macro-geometry and blitting?

Yes, I think that's good.


-- 
Boudewijn Rempt 
http://www.valdyas.org/fading/index.cgi