A first part of the layers/masks patch

[Dmitry Kazakov]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:02 AM, Sven Langkamp <sven.langkamp at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Dmitry Kazakov <dimula73 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Cyrille Berger <cberger at cberger.net>wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday 26 September 2009, Dmitry Kazakov wrote:
>>> > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Cyrille Berger <cberger at cberger.net
>>> >wrote:
>>> > > On Saturday 26 September 2009, Dmitry Kazakov wrote:
>>> > > > > for a,b,c) it doesn't work perfectly, but it's not that broken.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > But still not usable =(
>>> > >
>>> > > Well now, I have fix all the issue with the alpha colorspace (I have
>>> > > added alpha darken). All it remains to do is to make mask support the
>>> > > indirect painting interface.
>>> >
>>> > Well, no. You've not fixed that. It's just a workaround.
>>> >
>>> > Testcase:
>>> > 1) Create any mask (e.g. transparency mask)
>>> > 2) Paint something on a mask to get transparency
>>> >
>>> > Let's imagine after these steps you decide to make some rect visible
>>> again,
>>> > what are you going to do? In a good editor you just select this rect
>>> with
>>> > selection and fill it with a white color (or any semi-transparent
>>> one(!)).
>>> Why white ?
>>>
>>
>> I can't remember which color is used usually (e.g. in a "well known
>> graphical editor"). I guess, when we paint with white paint the image
>> becomes opaque, when we paint with black paint - becomes transparent, with
>> gray color - becomes semi-transparent.
>>
>
> At the moment there is a fundamental difference between Gimp/Photoshop and
> Krita in the way we see masks. In both cases we have and (8-bit) one channel
> paint device, so not a technical difference.
> The actual difference is how these channel is interpreted: In
> Gimp/Photoshop is a grayscale representation while in Krita it's an alpha
> representation.
>
> The grayscale way is probably what most artists are used too, even if the
> meaning of black and white is arbitary. The advantage is that it match good
> with gradient and fill.
>
> The way Krita uses is closer to the physical representation either there is
> something (color) or you can look through it. The problem that Dmitry
> descibes is that the only way to "paint" transparency is the eraser tool in
> Krita, which might be unusual for users form other editors. The bigger
> problem is that you e.g. can't use a transparent color in the fill tool.
>
> I hope that's the correctly summarizes it.
>

Thanks, Sven! That is exactly what i mean! =)

Another "biger problem" is that you can't paint semi-transparent masks even
with the eraser tool.


-- 
Dmitry Kazakov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20090927/c51a4e8d/attachment-0001.htm