koffice/krita/plugins/paintops

[Cyrille Berger]

On Sunday 25 April 2010, LukasT.dev at gmail.com wrote:
> I suppose that this feature is same as density in Soft brush.
> I would call it density here too.
Actually, if you look at the result it is a bit different. Soft brush's 
density is really a density, while brushop's randomness is really noise (and 
should probably be called like that, not sure why I used randomness). You can 
see the difference, a density of 0% in soft brush means nothing is drawn, 
while a randomness of 100% in brushop means a very noisy brush. It might be a 
good idea to also add density to brush, but maybe we should first think of how 
softbrush and brushop fit together.

And currently, I also feel our three ways of creating brushes are a bit 
disorganized between themselves, and also feature wise. For instance, would 
noise/density be a good addition to also "normal" brushes ? (And something I 
have been wondering too is also how to mix pattern with brush and color, but 
now I am getting a bit out of topic :) )

> Why don't you make it part of the mask generator code? The feature seems to
> be part of that code. Just my point of view of the design.
well that is a good question. puting in mask generator would mean that we have 
to duplicate the code in both mask generators (and maybe more if I find the 
motivation to make more types of shapes), further more, the symmetry 
optimization would not work anymore when randomness is enabled.

> Regarding performance:
> I would add if statement when the randomness is 0 to avoid computing random
> numbers. Generation of the random numbers is slow.
yup, even if rand is quiet fast.
-- 
Cyrille Berger