Hi
There are a couple of issues with filter effects UI, that I'm concerned about in the upcoming release.
First, at some point of development, the blur slider was disabled when there was a more complex filter attached to the object. I believe that this is a good thing, because it's not too clear, what it should do.
Nevertheless, right now it causes a crash. I haven't dwelved much into this problem and there may be some bigger underlying problem, that needs fixing. But unless there's a plan on how this slider should work with complex filter already attached to the object, I believe it should be disabled in those cases.
(see https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/186281 )
Second is a problem I fully realized only today: there's no user interface for setting enable-background property. Without this, the only working input images are Source Graphic and Source Alpha. Background Image and Background Alpha only contain data, when there's property 'enable-background:new' set on some parent object of the filtered object. Without this, they will just appear to not work.
(see https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/189341 )
(Fill Paint and Stroke Paint don't work because there's no renderer support yet for them in Inkscape)
On Feb 5, 2008 5:22 PM, Niko Kiirala <niko@...1267...> wrote:
Nevertheless, right now it causes a crash. I haven't dwelved much into this problem and there may be some bigger underlying problem, that needs fixing. But unless there's a plan on how this slider should work with complex filter already attached to the object, I believe it should be disabled in those cases.
As I said in that bug, I more like the idea of it adding a blur on top of the current stack, or adjust one if it exists - that was my thinking from the very beginning. Is this too difficult to implement?
Second is a problem I fully realized only today: there's no user interface for setting enable-background property. Without this, the only working input images are Source Graphic and Source Alpha. Background Image and Background Alpha only contain data, when there's property 'enable-background:new' set on some parent object of the filtered object. Without this, they will just appear to not work.
Will it break things too much if we just always add this attribute to root svg?
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:37:14 -0400, "bulia byak" <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
As I said in that bug, I more like the idea of it adding a blur on top of the current stack, or adjust one if it exists - that was my thinking from the very beginning. Is this too difficult to implement?
The only problem is what we do if multiple objects are sharing an SVG filter -- do we make a private clone of the filter like we do for gradients when adjusting transforms? (since object blurs should presumably be adjustable independently)
Second is a problem I fully realized only today: there's no user interface for setting enable-background property. Without this, the only working input images are Source Graphic and Source Alpha. Background Image and Background Alpha only contain data, when there's property 'enable-background:new' set on some parent object of the filtered object. Without this, they will just appear to not work.
Will it break things too much if we just always add this attribute to root svg?
We enable it at the expense of rendering performance; it is probably best to enable it only when it is needed (which is done in the blend mode code at least).
-mental
On Feb 6, 2008 5:12 PM, MenTaLguY <mental@...3...> wrote:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:37:14 -0400, "bulia byak" <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
As I said in that bug, I more like the idea of it adding a blur on top of the current stack, or adjust one if it exists - that was my thinking from the very beginning. Is this too difficult to implement?
The only problem is what we do if multiple objects are sharing an SVG filter -- do we make a private clone of the filter like we do for gradients when adjusting transforms? (since object blurs should presumably be adjustable independently)
Since SVG gives us no way to add several filters to the same object, I think cloning the stacks is the only way to go.
participants (3)
-
bulia byak -
MenTaLguY -
Niko Kiirala