Re: [Gimp-user] MIDI controllers for controlling brush size and colors [was: Save Export Complaints]

[Ryan Stark <effluxion googlemail com>]

OK. I'm not looking at Gimp at the moment. I have no source code to
compile but before compiling, as far as I can see there is a file
called gimppaintoptions.c. In that there are the lines:

GIMP_CONFIG_INSTALL_PROP_DOUBLE (object_class, PROP_BRUSH_SIZE
                                    "brush-size", _("Brush Size"),
-                                   1.0, 1000.0, DEFAULT_BRUSH_SIZE,
+                                  1.0, 10000.0, DEFAULT_BRUSH_SIZE,
                                    GIMP_PARAM_STATIC_STRINGS);

I'm not sure if these lines have changes made by me or not. It's just
a text file I found on a drive I have. It looks like they don't have
changes judging by the values?

On 13 September 2012 13:02, Ryan Stark <effluxion googlemail com> wrote:
> I can't even remember the brush size. I'm not looking at Gimp as
> present, It's just WAY too large in Gimp 2.8. 2.6 was fine. I've not
> used 2.6 for years so I can't remember everything about it as far as
> this logarithmic stuff etc is concerned. I'm not even looking at 2.8.
> I'm on a Mac. Gimp is on my Linux system. I flit from doing music on
> the Mac then doing graphics on Linux. I had to move off Linux for
> music unfortunately. It's not advanced enough yet. Next time I work in
> it for graphics I'll check all of this out. I'll need to compile Gimp
> to get the brush smaller. We need to collect info about what needs to
> be done then Gimp needs to be released in some usable state as far as
> brush sizing. Most users of Gimp are't going to compile and change
> code and I can't be bothered with that either. At present the
> situation will make people go to Mypaint or Krita for painting but in
> my opinion Gimp is still better.
>
> Largest brush size needs to be adjustable. As you say, this could be
> done in preferences. When I looked into how to find the largest brush
> size in code before compiling, I also noticed that this code had info
> to add UI to change that but I didn't use that. Now I don't know where
> I found that code change. It's on the net somewhere but I'll look for
> it again.
>
> On 13 September 2012 12:47, Joao S. O. Bueno <gwidion mpc com br> wrote:
> > On 13 September 2012 08:26, Ryan Stark <effluxion googlemail com> wrote:
> > > Yes, exactly, that is the problem. You can change the default brush
> > > largest size before compiling. Presently it's too large and this needs
> > > discussed with developers. I found somewhere how to change that code
> > > and it's very easy to do. Just find that one value and change it but
> > > also some UI that can be added to alter that largest brush size from
> > > Gimps UI. My Gimp is currently installed in the standard way. Next
> > > time I use it for painting I will compile and I'll document how to do
> > > that. At present, I can't even remember how to do that. I'm not even
> > > writing this from Linux. Somewhere on my Linux machine is a note on
> > > how to do it. This needs changing on Gimp. Whether you are using MIDI
> > > or a tablet slider, the largest size of brush is ludicrous. It effects
> > > all the brush sizing - stepping it up etc. It's no good.
> >
> >
> > What do you think would be a reasonable largest size multiplier
> > (as opposed to actual brush size)? The current value is 1000.0 -
> > in the previous version it was 10.0.Also, up to GIMP 2.6, feaures that
> > ranged
> > from 0 to 1000.0 (like actual brush radius) would vary in a logarithmic way,
> > meaning that if you started with a value of 5.0, small variations
> > close to that would make changes from 2 - to 20.0 --if you started at
> > 500.00,
> > the same small variations could take you to 150.0 - 1000.0
> >
> > Maybe, simply having the  largest brush size as  a value in preferences
> > could make up
> > for all use cases.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 13 September 2012 12:17, Joao S. O. Bueno <gwidion mpc com br> wrote:
> > > > On 13 September 2012 07:25, Ryan Stark <effluxion googlemail com> wrote:
> > > > > One problem with Gimp 2.8 is that the
> > > > > top size of the brush is far too big. If you compile from scratch you
> > > > > can change that. This needs to be mentioned in the Gimp developer
> > > > > list. It's also possible to have UI to set that largest size of brush
> > > > > so it's not too big. I've seen the code that needs added to do that.
> > > > > This all needs to be better sorted out to make Gimp more ideal for
> > > > > painting.These are simple changes that need to be in Gimp. Changing it
> > > > > and compiling is too much trouble.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oh well...we used to have logarithmic brush size control. Now, you have
> > > > a
> > > > linear space ranging from 0 to 1000.00 - if you have to control the
> > > > brush
> > > > size
> > > > using a 2 cm course MIDI pedal, it simply won' t do -out of the box -
> > > > But I think it could be controled using the dynamics curves:
> > > > create a new brush dynamics, map the input control to brush size there,
> > > > and
> > > > edit
> > > > its curve so that the maximum size (right) is at roughly 10% of the
> > > > graphic
> > > > height.
> > > >
> > > >   js
> > > >  -><-