On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 12:53:00PM +0200, Daniel Egger wrote:

Hija,

I just noticed that GIMP uses the label Radius to describe a slider which is effectivly describing the size of a square area. This seems pretty misleading to me, what about edgelength or alike instead?

I think "Size" would be more convenient, because every tool use size ...

Greetings,

Hi,

Daniel Egger writes:

I just noticed that GIMP uses the label Radius to describe a slider which is effectivly describing the size of a square area. This seems pretty misleading to me, what about edgelength or alike instead?

Are you refering to the GimpColorTools here? (Derivatives of GimpColorTool are all the color correction tools as well as the paint tools.) You are right that we are using a square area here but since the value in question describes the half width of the square, radius seems appropriate. But since the code for color-picking is now finally in a single place, we could change it to use and preview a circle. Would that make sense?

Sven

Hi,

Daniel Egger writes:

I guess I don't really understand your question. Do you want to know whether it makes sense to display the shape actually used for sampling or whether to use a circle instead of a square? I'd say: Make the shape configurable and always display the correct one in the image.

The shape displayed is what's used to sample, that's not a question. Make it configurable doesn't seem like a good idea here. I guess most people will agree that a circle is the natural choice. Actually there was no question, it was a hint to whoever feels this is important enough to be changed. It should be a very simple hack.

Sven

Hi,

Daniel Egger writes:

I don't. The colorpicker ist quite handy to determine the average color in some area and a square is much more natural to handle.

How is a square more natural to handle than a circle? All other apps I've seen so far use a circle.

Also for a circle to be somewhat usable you'd have to take the in/out coverage of the pixels under the radius into account or you'll get disturbing results for small sizes.

Of course I assumed a correct implementation.

Sven

From: Daniel Egger
To: Sven Neumann
CC: Gimp Developer
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Wrong terminology in color picker tool Date: 29 Jul 2003 13:39:02 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0

Am Die, 2003-07-29 um 10.33 schrieb Sven Neumann:

The shape displayed is what's used to sample, that's not a question. Make it configurable doesn't seem like a good idea here. I guess most people will agree that a circle is the natural choice.

I don't. The colorpicker ist quite handy to determine the average color in some area and a square is much more natural to handle. Also for a circle to be somewhat usable you'd have to take the in/out coverage of the pixels under the radius into account or you'll get disturbing results for small sizes.

i would tend to agree, if i want an average for an area i will usually be after a square anyway, however, it would be good to have a checkbox to switch between circular and "classic" behaviour, i don't know how much of a concern this is but surely you should be keeping inline with what the installed userbase are used to and are happy working with more than pandering to the Photo$hop audience...

Phil.

--
Servus,
Daniel
<< signature.asc >>

__________________

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Phil Harper wrote:

The shape displayed is what's used to sample, that's not a question. Make it configurable doesn't seem like a good idea here. I guess most people will agree that a circle is the natural choice.

I don't. The colorpicker ist quite handy to determine the average color in some area and a square is much more natural to handle. Also for a circle to be somewhat usable you'd have to take the in/out coverage of the pixels under the radius into account or you'll get disturbing results for small sizes.

i would tend to agree, if i want an average for an area i will usually be after a square anyway, however, it would be good to have a checkbox to switch between circular and "classic" behaviour, i don't know how much of a concern this is but surely you should be keeping inline with what the installed userbase are used to and are happy working with more than pandering to the Photo$hop audience...

I am inclined to believe that the different colour pickers are useful for different tasks and that it is worth while to include the various different colour pickers for the various different use cases.

(Although it is entirely possible that you are not talking about exactly what I think you are talking about. Tired, need food.)

-- Alan Horkan

Hi,

Daniel Egger writes:

It's easier to handle for arbitrary shaped regions IMHO. Coolest would be of course to provide a possibility to select a brush for the sample area; the grey value would determine the importance of the pixel on a given position. Selecting a black square brush would deliver the same result as at the moment, a black circle would result in Photoshop behaviour.

Cool, yes; perhaps even sometimes useful but certainly not very intuitive. IMO a circle would be the most useful solution and providing alternatives will probably be more confusing than helpful.

Sven