Selections on the Adjustment layers

[Sven Langkamp]

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Dmitry Kazakov <dimula73 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Dmitry Kazakov <dimula73 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> > At the moment you have an adjustment layer with an editable selection.
>> If
>> > you remove the selection you can't edit the adjustment layer itself
>> anymore
>> > (except changing the filter),
>>
>> I don't see any useful usecase of that, do you?
>>
>>
>> > but would have to use a seperate mask for the
>> > same effect.
>>
>> I guess the mask is more obvious [for a user]. One object - one
>> activity, that's like a unixway, right?
>>
>
> Well, just for history reasons. We discussed it on irc and came to the
> following:
>
> 1) Masks have a selection showing where to apply filter to.
> 2) They can't have a child, so they can't have a transparency mask to
> replace selections.
> 3) Adj. layers should work like adj. masks, so they should have a
> selection.
>
> It creates a bit of redundancy: selection / transparency masks are interchangeable.
> Unixway. =)
>

I hope I don't confuse it even more. There is redundancy as you can add a
transparency mask to adjustment layer (There is some problem with the
updating).
So it's possible to achieve the same result on different ways.

I think it's more pratical to use less masks to make the layer stack/tree
handling not more complicated than it already is. At some points I wish we
had a node-based system ;)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20090902/51f5d78d/attachment.htm