On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 23:54:35 -0400, "Christopher Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 9/27/06, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is a different issue from what was discussed here. You can toggle
> > between moving layers, selection masks or paths by using the modifiers:
> > Ctr
On 10/4/06, Christopher Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
These are the 2.2.13 options. I have to say I don't see a differencebetween 'pick' and 'move' for the normal/shifted case but I didn't tryMove moves the current item; pick moves the item that it thinks you're clicking on. In
2.3.x, the to
On 9/27/06, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is a different issue from what was discussed here. You can toggle
between moving layers, selection masks or paths by using the modifiers:
Ctrl or Alt (this will soon be indicated in the status bar). I don't
How will this be indicated?
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 12:32:33 +0200, saulgoode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
A google of
"CAD translations and transformations" will readily display how the two
operations are commonly paired. Perhaps a better question to ask would
be what graphics programs *don't* associate these operations?
Be
On 9/28/06, Michael Natterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In Current CVS, you have to press alt+shift or alt+control to actually
>move the pixels with a selection tool. Nobody does that accidentially,
>and it's a powerful tool for power users. I see no reason to remove it.
A feature bei
On 9/28/06, Michael Natterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 21:48 +0930, David Gowers wrote:> On 9/28/06, saulgoode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> Regarding the current user interface (in CVS), I fail to see
> any logic> in having the selection tools possessi
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 21:48 +0930, David Gowers wrote:
> On 9/28/06, saulgoode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Regarding the current user interface (in CVS), I fail to see
> any logic
> in having the selection tools possessing the ability to move
> selection
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 14:11 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 13:48:29 +0200, Michael Natterer
> > Aha... so which of the tools under "Transform Tool" is not doing
> > a transform? I don't see any that wouldn't perfectly fit into
> > the category.
> >
> > ciao,
> > --mitch
> >
On 9/28/06, saulgoode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Regarding the current user interface (in CVS), I fail to see any logicin having the selection tools possessing the ability to move selectioncontents, it is much simpler and more intuitive if they limit themselves
to selecting regions and not engage
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 13:48:29 +0200, Michael Natterer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 02:13 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're agreed about how this tool should operate but I'd still like to
review how some of these items are classed as transformations. I don't
think that m
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 02:13 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We're agreed about how this tool should operate but I'd still like to
> review how some of these items are classed as transformations. I dont
> think that makes sense to the user. I covered that in a reply to Sven.
Aha... so which o
While "moves" might not be considered to be within the category of
Transformations, they are commonly associated with them. A google of
"CAD translations and transformations" will readily display how the two
operations are commonly paired. Perhaps a better question to ask would
be what graphics pro
Hi,
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 02:13 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> We're agreed about how this tool should operate but I'd still like to
> review how some of these items are classed as transformations. I dont
> think that makes sense to the user.
Well, we can't really decide that without doi
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:52:56 +0200, William Skaggs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The user makes a selection then picks the move tool to move it. "The
fool!" you cry.
Well what do you expect him to do? That seems like a perfectly logical
way
to do it and I would bet you 9/10 new users will
From: Rapha�l Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>As a side note, it would be nice if the rectangle and ellipse
>selection tools (not the base rectangle tool) would take Alt into
>account before the selection is confirmed and behave as if the
>selection had been confirmed: Alt = move selection mask,
>> Bill, to you it *is* a transform tool because you are close to the code
>> and you know the way is it implemented. To the user it *is not* a
>> transform tool. It's just a tool off the palette like any other that is
>> called "Move" and that carries the hint "move layers, selections and
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 00:10:16 +0200, Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 00:04 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks, I was led to thinking it was by Bills comment and did not bother
checking the source.
My point is, moving a selection is probably not transformi
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:34:13 +0200, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
If you are using a development version, it is likely that your toolrc
has not been updated since a while. I recommend that you just delete
it and restart GIMP. Just rm ~/.gimp-2.3/toolrc.
-Raphaël
thanks , that g
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 23:21 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Bill, to you it *is* a transform tool because you are close to the code
> and you know the way is it implemented. To the user it *is not* a
> transform tool. It's just a tool off the palette like any other that is
> called "M
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:21:04 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You might see it as a lateral translation effected by simple transform
> matrix multiplication. The user just wants to move a bit to one side.
You probably misunderstood Bill. This is exactly what he meant by
saying that the Move to
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 22:14:38 +0200, William Skaggs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems that for consistency the Move tool should act like a
transform tool --- because after all, it *is* a transform tool.
That is, if there is a selection, it should move the contents
of the selection, otherwise
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 22:39:40 +0200, Raphaël Quinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
it would be nice if the rectangle and ellipse
selection tools (not the base rectangle tool) would take Alt into
account before the selection is confirmed and behave as if the
selection had been confirmed: Alt = move
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:42:38 -0700, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 09:01:29PM +0200, Rapha?l Quinet wrote:
> > So I am wondering... What should be the behavior of the Move tool
> > when a selection exists? Wouldn't it be good to have the ability to
> > move the
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 09:01:29PM +0200, Rapha?l Quinet wrote:
>
> So I am wondering... What should be the behavior of the Move tool
> when a selection exists? Wouldn't it be good to have the ability to
> move the selected pixels (and create a floating selection) instead of
> moving the whole l
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 13:14:38 -0700, "William Skaggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems that for consistency the Move tool should act like a
> transform tool --- because after all, it *is* a transform tool.
> That is, if there is a selection, it should move the contents
> of the selection, othe
It seems that for consistency the Move tool should act like a
transform tool --- because after all, it *is* a transform tool.
That is, if there is a selection, it should move the contents
of the selection, otherwise it should move the layer.
-- Bill
__ __ _
I just saw (on IRC) a confused user of gimp 2.2.11 who was not able to
move a part of an image to a different place. Despite some advice
from edhel and myself telling him to just drag the selected area to a
different place, it did not work. And we could not understand what
was wrong... until he f
27 matches
Mail list logo
