[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-kimageshop
Subject: Re: [calligra/calligra/2.9] krita/data/paintoppresets: restore broken presets
From: Scott Petrovic <scottpetrovic () gmail ! com>
Date: 2015-02-28 17:58:16
Message-ID: CA+VJOtzHtD1S2LP3c73K365wO+A_wyY+gt_448Q-Sg8u0Tx0jw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
What would you consider a good long term solution? None of those ideas were
actually mine. :) The first one was Boud's.
The brushes are always fast on linux, so the whole 'fast' idea is just a
Windows thing. Your naming idea is kind of nice to make sure we don't
accidentally overwrite the wrong one.
Separating the brushes is also is kind of a selling point for linux. "If
you want a better painting experience, you can try Krita on Linux. The
brushes are faster and higher quality".
Scott
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Timothée Giet <animtim@gmail.com> wrote:
> The first solution you suggest can be a good temporary workaround, if
> someone can make the build rules and create a special folder for
> paintoppresets to use for windows build.
>
> Though please consider some people can use it both on windows and linux,
> so try to keep presets as consistent as possible accross both sets
> (especially I noticed some presets you changed had very different size,
> that's not good..).
> Also maybe adding "_fast" to the names of presets that have been tweaked
> for speed can help make things more clear for everyone, and maybe help
> investigate the performance issues on (some) windows system.
>
>
>
> Le 28/02/2015 16:56, Scott Petrovic a écrit :
>
> Does this sum up everything?
> The original issue we are trying to solve here that Windows users are
> complaining about brushes being slow and unresponsive. A solution was put
> into place to modify the brushes to make them responsive and more usable.
> This solution introduced a new issue with Linux users not wanting to make
> this quality compromise. We have two concerns that need to be addressed.
>
> 1. Brushes on Windows are slow and unresponsive
> 2. Linux users do not want their brushes changed
>
>
> These are the current solutions that have been presented
> 1. Give Windows and Linux users a separate set of brushes by default
> 2. Include brushes that will work for Linux. And also include brushes
> that work for Windows (add both sets)
> 3. Reduce the amount of existing brushes, and then provider separate
> bundles
>
>
> The cleanest solution seems to be choice 1. This performance issue is
> not going away for Windows. I think the other two solutions create
> complexity for people using Krita. Based off my testing and the changes I
> made while using Windows, the quality does have to degrade slightly for the
> brushes to be usable on Windows. Brushes have to be usable though, they
> cannot remain how they were on Windows.
>
> thoughts?
> Scott
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Timothée Giet <animtim@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I prefer very much to add new preset (= different name and icons)
>> that are specifically optimized for speed,
>> rather than changing existing ones making their result different.
>> And using the resource bundle to do that when it's ready is a good idea.
>>
>>
>> Le 28/02/2015 14:20, Wolthera a écrit :
>>
>> It was not a 100% revert.
>>
>> However, I am happy we have a resource bundle system that's nearly done,
>> which means we can start subdividing the existing presets into bundles, and
>> then have a pack named default-pack-optimised and default-pack-quality.
>> Then we have optimised delivered with windows, and quality with linux.
>>
>> This is not about just krita being buggy, but also about getting the best
>> experience for both sides. Going forward and improving as much as we can.
>> Op 28 feb. 2015 14:10 schreef "Scott Petrovic" <scottpetrovic@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Almost 90% of all Krita users are on Windows (Google Analytics tells
>>> me this), so everything should really be tested heavily on that OS before
>>> we do any big changes that could impact performance. Was this commit just
>>> 100% reverts? Some of the original presets were unusable on Windows - which
>>> is why there were so many complaints with the 2.9 release. I tested each
>>> brush preset on Windows to make sure they were responsive with still
>>> achieving the highest quality I could get. The smudge brushes were by far
>>> the worst, but some of the pixel brushes were quite sluggish and
>>> frustrating to use as well. We cannot ignore the majority of our user
>>> base.
>>>
>>> I think the lesson learned is that there is a big performance
>>> difference between Linux and Windows brushes - and we need to be aware of
>>> them and test accordingly. There were also additional properties added to
>>> the brush engine settings in 2.9, so I am sure that played a role with how
>>> they are performing.
>>>
>>> Having slow default brushes makes the entire application look bad.If
>>> there are certain brushes that do not work well on Windows, but 'have' to
>>> have a certain quality, it might be best to remove those with the default
>>> installation. A separate "enhanced linux" brush pack might need to be
>>> available separately for linux users.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:50 AM, Timothée Giet <animtim@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I didn't test in 2.9 on windows, but I had occasions to test them on
>>>> pevious versions and they worked fine, no real difference with linux, and
>>>> nothing of what I changed since then should made them slower. If some
>>>> people have new performance issues that must be some regressions, so
>>>> changing presets is not the best way to fix this.
>>>>
>>>> I made some comparative tests to check before/after and restored
>>>> presets where the quality of the intended line suffer from the changed
>>>> settings, wether it was different softness, different line continuity, or
>>>> very different size...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le 28/02/2015 11:37, Boudewijn Rempt a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Should we have a different set on Windows and on Linux then? Or did
>>>> you test these presets on Windows, too?
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, Timothée Giet wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Krita mailing list
>> kimageshop@kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Krita mailing listkimageshop@kde.orghttps://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Krita mailing list
> kimageshop@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
>
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr"><div>What would you consider a good long term solution? None of those \
ideas were actually mine. :) The first one was Boud's.<br><br></div><div>The \
brushes are always fast on linux, so the whole 'fast' idea is just a Windows \
thing. Your naming idea is kind of nice to make sure we don't accidentally \
overwrite the wrong one.<br><br></div><div>Separating the brushes is also is kind of \
a selling point for linux. "If you want a better painting experience, you can \
try Krita on Linux. The brushes are faster and higher \
quality".<br><br></div><div>Scott <br><br><br></div></div><div \
class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 10:45 AM, \
Timothée Giet <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:animtim@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">animtim@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>The first solution you suggest can be a
good temporary workaround, if someone can make the build rules and
create a special folder for paintoppresets to use for windows
build.<br>
<br>
Though please consider some people can use it both on windows and
linux, so try to keep presets as consistent as possible accross
both sets (especially I noticed some presets you changed had very
different size, that's not good..). <br>
Also maybe adding "_fast" to the names of presets that have been
tweaked for speed can help make things more clear for everyone,
and maybe help investigate the performance issues on (some)
windows system.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 28/02/2015 16:56, Scott Petrovic a écrit :<br>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Does this sum up everything? <br>
The original issue we are trying to solve here that Windows
users are complaining about brushes being slow and
unresponsive. A solution was put into place to modify the
brushes to make them responsive and more usable. This
solution introduced a new issue with Linux users not wanting
to make this quality compromise. We have two concerns that
need to be addressed.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>1. Brushes on Windows are slow and unresponsive<br>
</div>
<div>2. Linux users do not want their brushes changed<br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>These are the current solutions that have been presented<br>
1. Give Windows and Linux users a separate set of brushes by
default<br>
</div>
<div>2. Include brushes that will work for Linux. And also
include brushes that work for Windows (add both sets)<br>
</div>
<div>3. Reduce the amount of existing brushes, and then
provider separate bundles<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The cleanest solution seems to be choice 1. This
performance issue is not going away for Windows. I think the
other two solutions create complexity for people using
Krita. Based off my testing and the changes I made while
using Windows, the quality does have to degrade slightly for
the brushes to be usable on Windows. Brushes have to be
usable though, they cannot remain how they were on Windows.
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>thoughts?</div>
<div>Scott<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:40 AM,
Timothée Giet <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:animtim@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">animtim@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px \
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Yes, I prefer very much to add new preset (=
different name and icons) that are specifically
optimized for speed,<br>
rather than changing existing ones making their result
different.<br>
And using the resource bundle to do that when it's ready
is a good idea.<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 28/02/2015 14:20, Wolthera a écrit :<br>
</div>
<span>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">It was not a 100% revert.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However, I am happy we have a resource
bundle system that's nearly done, which means we can
start subdividing the existing presets into bundles,
and then have a pack named default-pack-optimised
and default-pack-quality. Then we have optimised
delivered with windows, and quality with linux.</p>
<p dir="ltr">This is not about just krita being buggy,
but also about getting the best experience for both
sides. Going forward and improving as much as we
can.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Op 28 feb. 2015 14:10 schreef
"Scott Petrovic" <<a \
href="mailto:scottpetrovic@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">scottpetrovic@gmail.com</a>>:<br \
type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div dir="ltr">
<div>Almost 90% of all Krita users are on
Windows (Google Analytics tells me this), so
everything should really be tested heavily on
that OS before we do any big changes that
could impact performance. Was this commit just
100% reverts? Some of the original presets
were unusable on Windows - which is why there
were so many complaints with the 2.9 release.
I tested each brush preset on Windows to make
sure they were responsive with still achieving
the highest quality I could get. The smudge
brushes were by far the worst, but some of the
pixel brushes were quite sluggish and
frustrating to use as well. We cannot ignore
the majority of our user base. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
I think the lesson learned is that there is a
big performance difference between Linux and
Windows brushes - and we need to be aware of
them and test accordingly. There were also
additional properties added to the brush engine
settings in 2.9, so I am sure that played a role
with how they are performing.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Having slow default brushes makes the
entire application look bad.If there are
certain brushes that do not work well on
Windows, but 'have' to have a certain quality,
it might be best to remove those with the
default installation. A separate "enhanced
linux" brush pack might need to be available
separately for linux users.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>Scott</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at
5:50 AM, Timothée Giet <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:animtim@gmail.com" target="_blank">animtim@gmail.com</a>></span> \
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" \
text="#000000">
<div>I didn't test in 2.9 on windows, but
I had occasions to test them on pevious
versions and they worked fine, no real
difference with linux, and nothing of
what I changed since then should made
them slower. If some people have new
performance issues that must be some
regressions, so changing presets is not
the best way to fix this.<br>
<br>
I made some comparative tests to check
before/after and restored presets where
the quality of the intended line suffer
from the changed settings, wether it was
different softness, different line
continuity, or very different size...<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 28/02/2015 11:37, Boudewijn Rempt a
écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>Should we have a different set on
Windows and on Linux then? Or did
you test these presets on Windows,
too? <br>
<br>
On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, Timothée Giet
wrote: <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span></div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Krita mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:kimageshop@kde.org" \
target="_blank">kimageshop@kde.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop" \
target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop</a><br> <br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Krita mailing list
<a href="mailto:kimageshop@kde.org" target="_blank">kimageshop@kde.org</a>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop" \
target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop</a> </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Krita mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:kimageshop@kde.org">kimageshop@kde.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop" \
target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop</a><br> \
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
[Attachment #6 (text/plain)]
_______________________________________________
Krita mailing list
kimageshop@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kimageshop
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic