Re: [Inkscape-devel] NEW: blur quality/speed settings
On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 15:57 +0200, momo wrote:
Heya, when you really max out the blur, is it a bug that the blur is restricted to the selection bounding box around the blurred object? That seems like a bug to me, but it might be that way because of computation time. I think that adobe does the same thing...
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box. Can we expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
Molumen
Well, it seems this 10% around the object is in the SVG spec, so no (because we want to be an SVG compliant editor).
Jon
Thu, 12 Oct 2006 09:54:33 -0700 Jon Phillips <jon@...235...> kirjoitti:
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box. Can we expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
Well, it seems this 10% around the object is in the SVG spec, so no (because we want to be an SVG compliant editor).
These two can co-exist quite well: 10% is just the default value, it can be overridden with attributes x, y, width and height. There are plans of having these automatically filled with suitable values, so that the box wouldn't be visible.
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box. Can we expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
Well, it seems this 10% around the object is in the SVG spec, so no (because we want to be an SVG compliant editor).
These two can co-exist quite well: 10% is just the default value, it can be overridden with attributes x, y, width and height. There are plans of having these automatically filled with suitable values, so that the box wouldn't be visible.
It would be great for users like me to have the possibility to override these 10% around the object imposed by the SVG specs, as I mainly use Inkscape to prepare elements for print and web design and I almost never use SVG as the final format for my works. I am more interested in the behaviour of the effects (and other functions of Inkscape) that in the SVG compliance of the final documents, and I see Inkscape more as a vector editor than an SVG vector editor.
There was a discussion in this mailing list a while ago, about different SVG specs and about the way Inkscape should behave. Don't you think that it would be good to have the posibility to choose the "profile" of the new document?
Someting like that: File > New > a NEW window opens where I can select the profile I want to work with In that window I can select: - Inkscape vector document or Inkscape SVG (this is the specification that has no limitations, with a mention that certain effects can not be compatible with plain SVG) - SVG Tiny (Mobile) - SVG Basic - SVG Full - other specs, if needed.... - ... Depending on what profile I choose from the beginning, Inkscape modifies the behaviour of its instruments so the graphics produced are compliant with the selected profile (and specification)
Just my couple of thoughts, hope you'll find them useful :)
Thanks! Molumen
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box. Can we expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
Xara has feather.. not blur..
try grouping objects and feathering ... notice the intersections of the shapes within the group aren't blurred only the outline of the whole group..
;-)
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box. Can we expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
By the way, note that Xara does not have blur - it only has _feathering_. In many situations they are interchangeable, but not always. Blur is more generic than feathering - that is, if you have blur, you can do feathering with it, but the reverse is not true.
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box. Can we expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
By the way, note that Xara does not have blur - it only has _feathering_. In many situations they are interchangeable, but not always. Blur is more generic than feathering - that is, if you have blur, you can do feathering with it, but the reverse is not true.
-- bulia byak
Thank you for the explanation Bulia, I tried XARA and yes, the behaviour is quite different!! :) On the other side, the behaviour of Inkscape is still a little restrictive (10% box aroud the object is not very much) so it is not the most "comfortabe" tool for example to create a very diffused shadow... I attached 2 PNGs one created in Inkscape, the other one in xara.
The shadow created in Inkscape is a combination of gausian blur and circular transparency, and the problem is that the 10% box around the object is still visible... The shadow created in Xara is a combination of feather and circular transparency. Since there is no restricted 10% area, the shadow looks as it has to.
Thanks! Molumen
momo wrote:
Xara does the job smoothly and without putting the blur in a box.
Can > we
expect the same behaviour in Inkscape?
By the way, note that Xara does not have blur - it only has _feathering_. In many situations they are interchangeable, but not always. Blur is more generic than feathering - that is, if you have blur, you can do feathering with it, but the reverse is not true.
-- bulia byak
Thank you for the explanation Bulia, I tried XARA and yes, the behaviour is quite different!! :) On the other side, the behaviour of Inkscape is still a little restrictive (10% box aroud the object is not very much) so it is not the most "comfortabe" tool for example to create a very diffused shadow... I attached 2 PNGs one created in Inkscape, the other one in xara.
The shadow created in Inkscape is a combination of gausian blur and circular transparency, and the problem is that the 10% box around the object is still visible... The shadow created in Xara is a combination of feather and circular transparency. Since there is no restricted 10% area, the shadow looks as it has to.
Please be patient... we just told people to start using the blur function. If you read bulia's other recent post to the list titled "blur tips" you will see that he even suggested a workaround for the 10% limitation. I'm sure there will be something in the UI to modify that percentage at some point, but it CAN be worked around already. :)
-Josh
On 10/12/06, momo <momo@...1386...> wrote:
Thank you for the explanation Bulia, I tried XARA and yes, the behaviour is quite different!! :) On the other side, the behaviour of Inkscape is still a little restrictive (10% box aroud the object is not very much) so it is not the most "comfortabe" tool for example to create a very diffused shadow...
As others already explained, this is not something that cannot be fixed. It's just a case of us not (yet) having bothered to change the default. Stay tuned, it should be ready before the release. If you want a workaround that works right now, read my message titled "Blur tips" sent yesterday.
participants (6)
-
Andy Fitzsimon -
bulia byak -
Jon Phillips -
Joshua A. Andler -
momo -
Niko Kiirala