Login - Create Account
Bookmark and Share

Overrides on a per-component basis?

Login or Register to post new topics or replies
Crapadilla
lvl 52 Filter Weaver and Official "Filter Forge Seer"

Posts: 4245
Filters: 65
It's good to see Overrides introduced to FF. Yet I can't help but wonder whether a generaliized system of per-component overrides would be more powerful and versatile... !?

Imagine each and every component having an override for [Size, pixels], [Variation] and [Seamless-Tiling]! Some components currently already have this (hidden within their properties). For example:

- The Frame component has a Fixed Size option which locally disables [Size, pixels].

- The Noise Gradient has the Randomizable option which locally disables [Variation].

Now, to avoid over-burderning the component's properties tabs with the additional override drop-down selectors, I propose an additional 'appendage' for each component, similar to the Filter Controls 'appendage' of the Result component. The Filter Editor GUI could hide this by default and make it accessible to advanced users only.

When visible, the Overrides 'appendage' would look like so:

--- Crapadilla says: "Damn you, stupid redundant feature requests!" ;)
  Details E-Mail
Crapadilla
lvl 52 Filter Weaver and Official "Filter Forge Seer"

Posts: 4245
Filters: 65
Of course, a system like this would first and foremost require that components with [Seamless-Tiling] and [Non-Seamless Tiling] can peacefully co-exist within the same filter. Non-seamless components would render as expected within the image bounds, but may produce visible seams if a filter author is not careful.

There exist many filters on the library which contain procedures that could be considered 'non-seamless' (take the often used polar coordinate transformations (a.k.a. 'Spherify')), yet they tile perfectly fine!

Many filters that mix Frame components with size-affected components suffer from the inability to disable [Size, pixels] on a per component basis. Finally, Profile Gradients could become much more versatile if they could be made unaffected by [Size, pixels].
--- Crapadilla says: "Damn you, stupid redundant feature requests!" ;)
  Details E-Mail
StevieJ
Designer/Artist

Posts: 11250
Filters: 163
Quote
Crapadilla wrote:
Many filters that mix Frame components with size-affected components suffer from the inability to disable [Size, pixels] on a per component basis. Finally, Profile Gradients could become much more versatile if they could be made unaffected by [Size, pixels].

+2 Exactly!!! I've brought this up several times in the past.....but maybe you'll have better luck with it..... smile;) smile:D

..... smile:devil:
Steve

"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :)
  Details E-Mail
Crapadilla
lvl 52 Filter Weaver and Official "Filter Forge Seer"

Posts: 4245
Filters: 65
Quote
StevieJ wrote:
...but maybe you'll have better luck with it...


Looks like I don't have any luck with it either! smile:(
--- Crapadilla says: "Damn you, stupid redundant feature requests!" ;)
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
What you're describing is just a part of the solution -- or, rather, of the problem.

While I don't have a well-worded description of what I consider to be the real solution, I do have some ideas. Roughly speaking, all components should have separate mappable transforms (of which the current implementation of Size is just a special case), seamlessness and the possibility to specify target image bounds on a per-component basis, along with the user-selectable method of handling samples beyond these bounds (wrap, mirror, extend etc.) -- or to acquire these image bounds from images loaded into FF.
  Details E-Mail
Crapadilla
lvl 52 Filter Weaver and Official "Filter Forge Seer"

Posts: 4245
Filters: 65
Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote:
Roughly speaking, all components should have separate mappable transforms (of which the current implementation of Size is just a special case), seamlessness and the possibility to specify target image bounds on a per-component basis, along with the user-selectable method of handling samples beyond these bounds (wrap, mirror, extend etc.) -- or to acquire these image bounds from images loaded into FF.


Yes, that's exactly what I mean!

To describe it in Filter Editor / node-network terms: All components are currently automatically and irrevocably hard-wired to three global Control Components (which are always there and thus hidden inside the Filter Editor for user-convenience):

- Size, pixels
(a slider control component that is connected to each and every components' invisible Scale map input)

- Variation
(another slider control component connected to each and every components' invisible Variation input)

- Seamless Tiling
(a checkbox control component that is connected to each and every components' invisible Seamless Tiling drop-down selector)

Overriding any of the above global controls on a single component would be equivalent to deleting the respective connection to one of their 'invisible' inputs and setting this value manually (or even map it with another component?).

In effect, we could visualize this as a set of "underground connections" which are normally not visible inside the Filter Editor -- they are located on a sub-level of the Filter Editor, so to speak. Spinning this further, one could imagine putting the Filter Editor into an "underground" mode that allowed for visually editing these "under-the-hood" connections.

Hmmmm... the possibilities! smile:D

Or what if - instead of activating some "underground" mode - these hidden inputs were actually exposed from the get-go as visible control/map inputs on each and every component? We'd have to deal with a lot of previously hidden connections cluttering the editor! That is, unless we find a way to visually represent these global control connections without actually drawing connection lines inside the Filter Editor...
--- Crapadilla says: "Damn you, stupid redundant feature requests!" ;)
  Details E-Mail
ronjonnie
Designer / Artist

Posts: 753
Filters: 320
Good morning Everyone,

In continuation from: To Seam or Not to Seam:
http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...7&TID=7288

I need some help PLEASE. smile:|

Does all this above mean it will be worked out on the final release?
I have a problem. I know I have not been into Filter Forge as long as the famous ones. Hate to mention names, in fear of leaving a famous one out.. smile;)

My point is, Beta 2, when I copy & paste one of my old filters, or a part of one into a new one I'm building, the Seamless option is grayed out, (non active).smile:evil:
WHY is that? I know it was NOT that way before the NEW Beta version.
I spent quite a long time yesterday trying to figure it, out & got nowhere. smile:!:

Any help from the great minds, would be very much appreciated.

Have a GREAT day! smile:)

Ron
zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time.
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
Quote
ronjonnie wrote:
My point is, Beta 2, when I copy & paste one of my old filters, or a part of one into a new one I'm building, the Seamless option is grayed out, (non active)


Does the new filter you're building and into which you're copy/pasting your previous work include any of the new non-seamless components (Scale, Rotate, Free Gradient, Free Ellipse etc.)?
  Details E-Mail
ronjonnie
Designer / Artist

Posts: 753
Filters: 320
Hey Vladimir,

Thank you for the reply. Yes, sorry. As a test, I used a filter from the Forum, I It was XY Anchor by Work, Yes it was not seamless. Why is that?
Please take a look at it for me. Any help I GREATLY appreciate.
Can this filter be made as seamless?

Thank you for your time, smile:)

Ron

Fractal Art 3 by Ronjonie.ffxml
zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time.
  Details E-Mail
ronjonnie
Designer / Artist

Posts: 753
Filters: 320
Quote

Yes, sorry. As a test, I used a filter from the Forum, I It was XY Anchor by Work, Yes it was not seamless. Why is that?


Ron

XY Anchor.ffxml
zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time.
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
Quote
ronjonnie wrote:
Fractal Art 3 by Ronjonie.ffxml


This one includes a group of Free Gradients, which aren't seamless.

Quote
ronjonnie wrote:
XY Anchor.ffxml


Same here, three Free Gradients.
  Details E-Mail
ronjonnie
Designer / Artist

Posts: 753
Filters: 320
Vladimir,

Thank you. When the final Version of Filter Forge is finished, after all of the Beta testing, will this problem be resolved? I sure hope do.

Thank you for your time Vladimir, I love the program!
I will love it more after certain issues are resolved.

Ron
zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time.
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
Quote
ronjonnie wrote:
Thank you. When the final Version of Filter Forge is finished, after all of the Beta testing, will this problem be resolved?


"This is not a bug, this is a feature" smile:D. Free Gradient does not support seamless tiling by design, therefore its presence in a filter disables the Seamless Tiling checkbox.
  Details E-Mail
ronjonnie
Designer / Artist

Posts: 753
Filters: 320
Vladimir,

Thank you. Lots to learn. smile;)

Crapadilla wrote:
Quote
Yes, that's exactly what I mean!


6th down from the top. Must be in here somewhere.

Ron
zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time.
  Details E-Mail
infiniview
digital artist

Posts: 202
Filters: 13
Quote
Free Gradient does not support seamless tiling by design, therefore its presence in a filter disables the Seamless Tiling checkbox.


Hi Vlad,

What if this was approached in a different way? I keep running into the same thing. Trying to experiment with the components only to find the seamless button greyed out.

Instead of just flat out preventing them from being viewed in a seamless manner. Let the user go ahead and see what the results look like no matter if those results support actual seamlessness or not. That way non traditional experimenters like myself can get non traditional results. So what if in most cases it may look like a train wreck, haha. At least
that will be on the user. As the way it is it just seems like a roadblock.

And if you Really do not want to allow that, how about putting some mark on the components that will not allow seamless tiling so that they are easily recognizable. Then they can be more easily avoided or found depending on what the user's needs are.

Or how about just a warning or something that the user can bypass if they so choose?

My biggest frustration so far with 2.0 is the seamless button being greyed out and then not knowing which components are going to have this same issue.

Thanks in advance. smile:)
at least 90 percent of all sensation is texture, even beyond the visual, with elements of noise, tone, gradients, interval and degree.
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
The current plan is as follows:

1. Implement a balloon notification that pops up when a user adds a non-seamless component to the filter. We would have added it in a hotfix already, but it requires some additional coding in the Editor.

2. Implement an additional override option for the Seamless Tiling checkbox that would force it to "always enabled". This will make previews of non-seamless components look weird when the Seamless Tiling is turned on, but it will solve the problem.

Hopefully, both will be available in the Beta Stage 4.
  Details E-Mail
Kraellin
Kraellin

Posts: 12603
Filters: 97
Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote:
1. Implement a balloon notification that pops up when a user adds a non-seamless component to the filter. We would have added it in a hotfix already, but it requires some additional coding in the Editor.


as long as it's not another popup i have to click 'ok' on. i already hate that one when you add a filter to your favorites list. i like the notification; i just dont like having to click it off.
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!

Craig
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
No, definitely not a modal dialog with a mandatory OK button -- I'm talking about the yellow thingies that we use as notifications in the Filter Editor, such as the thingy that shows elapsed rendering time.
  Details E-Mail
Kraellin
Kraellin

Posts: 12603
Filters: 97
ah, ok.
If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!

Craig
  Details E-Mail
Vladimir Golovin
Administrator
Filter Forge, Inc.
Posts: 3147
Filters: 55
Quote
Vladimir Golovin wrote:
The current plan is as follows:

1. Implement a balloon notification that pops up when a user adds a non-seamless component to the filter. We would have added it in a hotfix already, but it requires some additional coding in the Editor.

2. Implement an additional override option for the Seamless Tiling checkbox that would force it to "always enabled". This will make previews of non-seamless components look weird when the Seamless Tiling is turned on, but it will solve the problem.


Both are now implemented (will be available in the upcoming beta stage.)
  Details E-Mail
ronjonnie
Designer / Artist

Posts: 753
Filters: 320
Vladimir,

That sounds GREAT!

We all, are SOO looking forward to seamless filters again with ALL the NEW features!

THANK YOU!

Have a GREAT day! smile:)

Ron
zazzle.com/Ronspassionfordesign*
So much to learn, so little time.
  Details E-Mail

Join Our Community!

Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!

17,284 Registered Users
+26 new in 7 days!

120,676 Posts
+42 new last day!

11,069 Topics
+27 new in 7 days!

Online Users Last 5 minutes:

11 unregistered users.

Recent Wiki Edits:

Follow filterforge on Twitter