New brush dialog
enkithan at free.fr
Thu Jun 17 10:22:54 CEST 2010
On 17/06/2010 08:11, LukasT.dev at gmail.com wrote:
> I'm working on polishing spray paintop and make in more consistent with other
> paintops. The aim is to support Photoshop brush presets.
> Basically I added support of the brush tips from standard brush dialog to
> spray so now you can spray Auto brush, Predefinned brush and even Text :)
> And I separated Shape dynamics from the spray into one dialog.
> The old spray supported also QPainterPath brush. It is brush defined by points
> (polygon) and filled with constant color with nicely anti-aliased edges.
> Spray supported two shapes - circle and rectangle. It is easy to add new
> shapes - just need to define some algorithm. These brushes are easy to scale
> (scale the points, not pixel mask) compared to preddefined brushes which looks
> quite bad when scaled too much. This brush could be used for rasterizing some
> vector file format maybe? Or I can image to do "random shape" with it easily
> to support something more like what alchemy is doing.
Are your QPainterPath shapes and Autobrush shapes different ? They seems
to have the same purpose. If so, maybe they could be merged somehow ?
What about Flake shape ? They have the advantage to be customizable by
the user. For example, double-clicking on a vector tip would open a new
Karbon or Krita window to edit the shape. Saving over would update the
> Then there is pixel in spray. And it's anti-aliased version. I think they are
> usable for details and pixel work. Aliased version is sharp, giving rough look
> and anti-aliased version is for boud :) And this type of particle in spray
> also simulate spray from KolourPaint or MS Paint. Autobrush with 1px diameter
> is not pixel, even it's anti-aliased version looks different.
> Then there is QImage brush. You load one picture in tons of format supported
> by QImage and when you have kdelibs, even more formats. The use case is,
> I made a photo of a leaf and I want to test it quickly how it looks when I
> paint with it. Yes, we have preddefined brushes, but I don't know if supporting
> pure jpg, png without meta information there is the way to go. I don't think
I changed my mind a bit on that, I didn't realize the need of meta-data
I think that images loaded as predefined brushes should be converted to
the current format and copied to the brush tip folder (I don't like the
idea of having brush tips outside the brush tip folder, it's too easy to
forget that it's linked to some PaintOp and erase it).
Maybe Krita should have its own brush format, simple and clean without
the redundant things from Gimp's brushes (redundant because paintop
settings allow to do the same thing in a more powerful way)?
Another solution could be to separate meta-data from the image, but
that's still like creating a new format.
For your use case with the leaf photo, it will be solved easily by the
come back of custom brushes:
Then you would just open your image > select all > add to predefined
Another idea could be to add a new entry to the menu that appears when
an image is drag&dropped into Krita:
- Add to Predefined Brushes.
But it is rare than an image is perfectly fit to be used as brush tip.
It often need some editing; trial and error.
> I think they all are usable and I want to support them in spray at least.
> First what do you think about those brushes?
> I started to work on making them KisBrush-based brushes but it has
> some problems. First the UI. Should I add one Tab with all of these brushes to
> the standard dialog? Or maybe should I add More Tabs? (for every type of brush
> I describe - Polygon, Pixel, Image).
I had proposed once that all brush tips would be displayed in the
predefined brush dialog. A colored dot would indicated the type of brush
tip (for example, red for raster, blue for vector, green for text,
etc...). Then other tabs would be only used more rarely, to create new
brush tip presets.
Every steps would be clearly defined then :
brush tip creation | brush tip preset selection | paintop creation |
paintop preset selection.
But more thinking is needed, I think.
> Other thing is also performance, but that later. I just wanted to draw a
> picture of what I'm doing right now.
> kimageshop mailing list
> kimageshop at kde.org
More information about the kimageshop