https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=398990
katearche...@yandex.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|INTENTIONAL |---
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
--- Comment #14 from katearche...@yandex.ru ---
I strongly disagree. Information IS destroyed.
Let's assume I'm a new user knowing nothing about blend modes and internal
workings of krita.
It's confusing as hell that in one case selecting two layers: a filter layer
and a paint layer and merging them will result in losing a transparency while
applying a filter from filters menu _OR_ merging two paint layers will preserve
transparency.
The strait-forward way of thinking in merging layers is that if the pixels are
transparent("what you see is what you get") they will remain like this. And if
any other merging operation keeps the transparency of the bottom layer why it
must be different for filter layers?
And what you are proposing: to group layers beforehand is _VERY_ unintuitive
and there is no way a user without advanced knowledge of krita inner workings.
And while it's not a bug in itself this is wrong UX behaviour and it should be
discussed more than with one person and preferably with artists not the
developers(I mean no disrespect at all but since you are so deeply involved in
the code itself your point of view is very biased on a UX matter). So I reopen
is so it can be discussed or at least someone other than Dmitry from the
development team will make a statement about the issue.
My point of view on this: If filter layers are merged with selected layers it
should be possible(at least as an option, because why would you force user to
make monkey job and it IS a monkey job that can be clearly automated with a
little effort even via python script) to create a temporary group and merge
that group only so transparent pixels will be preserved.
As it is standing now it's inconsistent with other merging operations and is
confusing(even the other participant in the thread confirms it: "It indeed is
inconsistent. If a Levels filter layer is created and adjusted it does not
behave the same as if HSV filter layer is created and adjusted. The Levels
layer will properly adapt to new layer changes below, whereas HSV seems to
rasterize itself on any change. Merging does lose transparency, which is the
part that seems like a side effect.").
So I propose to at least have a wider discussion why this is cannot be
implemented to have a more consistent workflow with merging layers?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
