[calligra/calligra/2.9] krita/data/paintoppresets: restore broken presets

[Scott Petrovic]

Does this sum up everything?
The original issue we are trying to solve here that Windows users are
complaining about brushes being slow and unresponsive. A solution was put
into place to modify the brushes to make them responsive and more usable.
This solution introduced a new issue with Linux users not wanting to make
this quality compromise. We have two concerns that need to be addressed.

1. Brushes on Windows are slow and unresponsive
2. Linux users do not want their brushes changed


These are the current solutions that have been presented
1. Give Windows and Linux users a separate set of brushes by default
2. Include brushes that will work for Linux. And also include brushes that
work for Windows (add both sets)
3. Reduce the amount of existing brushes, and then provider separate bundles


The cleanest solution seems to be choice 1. This performance issue is not
going away for Windows. I think the other two solutions create complexity
for people using Krita. Based off my testing and the changes I made while
using Windows, the quality does have to degrade slightly for the brushes to
be usable on Windows. Brushes have to be usable though, they cannot remain
how they were on Windows.

thoughts?
Scott


On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Timothée Giet <animtim at gmail.com> wrote:

>  Yes, I prefer very much to add new preset (= different name and icons)
> that are specifically optimized for speed,
> rather than changing existing ones making their result different.
> And using the resource bundle to do that when it's ready is a good idea.
>
>
> Le 28/02/2015 14:20, Wolthera a écrit :
>
> It was not a 100% revert.
>
> However, I am happy we have a resource bundle system that's nearly done,
> which means we can start subdividing the existing presets into bundles, and
> then have a pack named default-pack-optimised and default-pack-quality.
> Then we have optimised delivered with windows, and quality with linux.
>
> This is not about just krita being buggy, but also about getting the best
> experience for both sides. Going forward and improving as much as we can.
> Op 28 feb. 2015 14:10 schreef "Scott Petrovic" <scottpetrovic at gmail.com>:
>
>>  Almost 90% of all Krita users are on Windows (Google Analytics tells me
>> this), so everything should really be tested heavily on that OS before we
>> do any big changes that could impact performance. Was this commit just 100%
>> reverts? Some of the original presets were unusable on Windows - which is
>> why there were so many complaints with the 2.9 release.  I tested each
>> brush preset on Windows to make sure they were responsive with still
>> achieving the highest quality I could get. The smudge brushes were by far
>> the worst, but some of the pixel brushes were quite sluggish and
>> frustrating to use as well.  We cannot ignore the majority of our user
>> base.
>>
>>  I think the lesson learned is that there is a big performance difference
>> between Linux and Windows brushes - and we need to be aware of them and
>> test accordingly. There were also additional properties added to the brush
>> engine settings in 2.9, so I am sure that played a role with how they are
>> performing.
>>
>>  Having slow default brushes makes the entire application look bad.If
>> there are certain brushes that do not work well on Windows, but 'have' to
>> have a certain quality, it might be best to remove those with the default
>> installation. A separate "enhanced linux" brush pack might need to be
>> available separately for linux users.
>>
>>  Scott
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Timothée Giet <animtim at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I didn't test in 2.9 on windows, but I had occasions to test them on
>>> pevious versions and they worked fine, no real difference with linux, and
>>> nothing of what I changed since then should made them slower. If some
>>> people have new performance issues that must be some regressions, so
>>> changing presets is not the best way to fix this.
>>>
>>> I made some comparative tests to check before/after and restored presets
>>> where the quality of the intended line suffer from the changed settings,
>>> wether it was different softness, different line continuity, or very
>>> different size...
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 28/02/2015 11:37, Boudewijn Rempt a écrit :
>>>
>>>  Should we have a different set on Windows and on Linux then? Or did
>>> you test these presets on Windows, too?
>>>
>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, Timothée Giet wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Krita mailing list
> kimageshop at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20150228/08938abc/attachment.html>