Re: [Gimp-developer] Blend Tool UI

[Michael Henning <drawoc darkrefraction com>]

Joao: You might have misunderstood me. I'm referring to the blend
tool, not the gradient editor.

scl: Just the ones whose name starts with 'Shaped'.

Ofnuts: Yes, Filters>Render is probably a better place than the bucket
tool, if we do move the shapebursts.

Alexandre: I'm hoping to also hook up the live preview to update along
with any modifications of the gradient that happen in the gradient
editor. It isn't quite the same as on-canvas editing of color stops,
but if you're doing that sort of work, it should become it a lot
nicer.

peter:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:49 AM, peter sikking <peter mmiworks net> wrote:
> Michael Henning wrote:
> > * I'd like to make the blend tool generally more interactive. By
> > this, I mean that after the user has created a gradient, they will be
> > presented with handles that they can use to modify the endpoints of
> > the gradient before committing their changes.
>
> good plan. combine it with updating the colours of the
> endpoints to make it truly adjustable to get it _right_
>
> hint: please do not make the endpoint handles small;
> think generous (more tens of pixels than single digits) and
> also show where the exact endpoint is in the centre of the handle
> (say, with a cross to aim).

I had been imagining selection handles that are simply filled circles.
In my early prototype, they look like this:
http://i.imgur.com/t4g1zOE.png

I think they are big enough, but they don't really show the exact
location of the endpoint. I guess I'll need to experiment with this
more.

I have a feeling that If I make them circle outlines with crosshairs
in them, they'll look cluttered. Having just crosshairs won't make it
obvious that you can drag the points. Maybe drawing circles most of
the time, and then hiding the circles and switching to crosshairs
while dragging the points, would be good? (The idea is to show the
precise handles when they're needed during dragging, and then switch
to handles that invite grabbing for the remainder of the time.)

> > * I'd also like to add a live preview to the blend tool so users can
> > preview the gradient and experiment with different options, before
> > committing their changes.
>
> yes, vital for making the previous point work.
>
> please make commit an implicit thing (moving on to another
> tool, starting another gradient) combined with explicit
> (e.g. <return>) as a backup. see handling of committing
> selections in the rectangular selection tool.

Agreed. I wasn't planning to make starting another gradient commit the
first, but now that I think about it, that does make more sense.

> > * I'm also planning to add undo support within the tool.
>
> I hope you mean: step-by-step undo while not committed,
> after a commit undo the whole committed gradient.

Yes, that's exactly the plan.

> again: vital, to make other points above _really_ work.
> both for the interactive part and as a form of non-committing
>
> > * The general consensus within the dev team seems to be that the
> > shapebursts (all of the gradient types currently marked "shaped")
> > should be moved out of the blend tool. They would likely be moved into
> > either a menu item, or (maybe?) within the fill tool.
>
> as far as my thoughts go: there will be more working
> with (vector) shapes in the future, and modifying those
> shapes with a gradient fill (by the gradient tool)
> could be the way to handle that.

Hmm, you might have misunderstood what I meant by shapebursts. The
shapebursts are special gradients that mimic the shape of your
selection (currently labeled "Shaped (angular)", "Shaped (spherical)",
and "Shaped (dimpled)"). Anyway, at this point I'm really conflicted
as to what should be done with them. I'm not sure whether they belong
in the blend tool or not right now.

Anyway, thanks for the input.

  -- drawoc