Thanks a lot for your insight! Another person in the GitLab report also stressed the importance of layer masks with an adjustment layer workflow - it’s something I’ll definitely look into.
While NDE may not be inherently sluggish, I definitely noticed some slowdown when applying layer styles in Krita. I’m hoping GEGL will have good performance, at least with only a few effects or adjustments applied. The split view feature of the current destructive filters works well on my machine so I’m optimistic, but I’ll find out when I’ve got a working prototype.
Hm, but that’s probably not what I meant … I’m not a native English speaker so maybe I struggle to get the message right. With my comment, I was only referring to possible trigger modes of a future gimp nde filter implementation.
My hack raw processor presents a tool chain (equivalent to layers), and I simply implemented an enable/disable checkbox for each tool (layer). Then, most tools have a “do-nothing” default (I can changed that in the properties), so they don’t automatically impose their processing when added to the tool chain. Food for thought…
I think “smart” is not a good idea; will just beg unproductive questions about “why won’t this work?” when the smartness kicks in…
GEGL is faster then Krita. But it will go slow if a dozen or so filters are chained. That is why the layer should be rasterized then non-destructive filters reran and recalculated when the user does an edit.
Adobe and Pixelitor do this in their “smart objects”.
If it happens, I will be more than happy! I would suggest some basic tools like curves, hue-saturation, color temperature/ balance and exposure as the first step.
Thanks for the suggestion! After discussing this idea with the developers, the goal is for everything to be a layer effect (rather than a distinction between layer styles and adjustment layers).
In other words, once we can add NDE filters to layers, you’ll be able to add any of those operations and more.
Hi! First off, that video is rather old - there’s been a lot of advancements since then. Here’s a better one (and even it’s out of date since I now have a basic GUI in place): (2) GIMP WIP - NDE Built in - YouTube
As for the inverted effect: Imagine you have a pane of red glass. Currently, applying a filter in GIMP is like putting that glass in front of the image and then painting on the glass. You can remove the glass, but you also lose everything you painted after applying it.
The NDE implementation is like painting on the image behind the glass. If you have the glass in front of you, your paint will appear tinted red (like my brush in the old video) - but you can remove your glass to see the original image without losing all the work you’ve done. Does that help explain a bit better?
Heh - well, as long as something helped then I’m happy.
Yes, that’s the goal. Aryeom is working on a UI design which I’ll try to implement - once that’s done, I’ll have another video showing how you can update/rearrange existing filters.
Question, would it be difficult to implement things we seen in Krita? Yes, most perceive it as a exclusively drawing software, but that doesn’t detract from the observation that there are things that offers flexible NDE in there that can be used for photo-manipulation.
I’m thinking of things like:
Clone Layers
File Layers
Fill Layers
Transform Layers/Mask
Clone Layers and File Layers especially as they do allow automated editing with different set ups.
Jehan has an in-progress implementation of File/Link Layers which will probably be done in the next release after 3.0 (alongside vector layers hopefully).
Fill layers will be possible with this - you’d just add a GEGL solid color, gradient, or pattern layer effect. A convenience feature that auto-applies these may end up as part of the UI.
Pippin mentioned a concept of “clone-nodes” which could help implement clone layers. Something to look at once the layer effects are implemented.
I’m not familar with Transform Layers - do you have an example of how they should work?