jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) (12/18/90)
And now for my progress report:
It seems that Sozobon C only supports "sprite" calls properly
if you use "minimum.h". I understand that this can be a problem
because it may mean that GEM is not supported if you use "minimum.h".
So for the time being, it would seem that you either develop a
GEM application or a Sprite application. At least that seems to
be a way of looking at it. It turns out that I could complete my
current program without Sprites, though it would have been a better
program if I could use them, and so I'm not concerned. I intend
to proceed with another program that will need sprites but not GEM
later so this will work out satisfactory as well.
Now on to another question. I haven't reached the point where
this question is important quite yet, but I will soon.
In CyberPaint, Jim Kent used a custom menu interface which I
really liked. I've seen similar menus in Amiga programs. The menu
bar is hidden until you click and then it appears at the top of
the screen and menus drop down covering only part of the "work" area
leaving the rest visible. This is particularly good for graphic
programs of an artistic nature because, unlike Degas, it leaves as
much of the "work" on-screen at all possible times. If you're not
an "artist" you may not realize why this is important at first, but
if you've ever done extensive art it becomes a fairly obvious matter.
At any rate, I like the idea generally and even though my current
project is not a "paint" program, I would like to impliment this
type of menu. But I've *never* seen it done in GEM/TOS programs.
As such, I have a feeling it's probably not possible. Does anybody
know for sure? It would seem to me that if I define a "window"
with 0 height but with a "menu bar" I should be able to do the same
type of thing, but would the drop down menus work over the window
underneath? Or would I have to define the window to be at least
the height of the largest drop down menu?
--
Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880
lsuc!jimomura
Byte Information eXchange: jimomuraekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen) (12/22/90)
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: - I've seen similar menus in Amiga programs. The menu bar is hidden - until you click and then it appears at the top of the screen and - menus drop down covering only part of the "work" area leaving the - rest visible. This is particularly good for graphic programs of an - artistic nature because, unlike Degas, it leaves as much of the - "work" on-screen at all possible times. I kinda like the way Degas does things, right button to toggle between drawing area and commands. Any way you slice it, the Degas method or the hidden menus you described above, you still gotta hit something. - If you're not an "artist" you may not realize why this is important - at first, but if you've ever done extensive art it becomes a fairly - obvious matter. Well, I don't [want to :^) ] consider myself an "artist," but I am emphasizing in computer graphics and have used many drawing programs. I've never understood the "Amiga-method" of calling up the drop-down menus. Why should I have to hold down the right button? It's an awkward and unusual way, IMHO, of calling the menus. - At any rate, I like the idea generally and even though my current - project is not a "paint" program, I would like to impliment this - type of menu. But I've *never* seen it done in GEM/TOS programs. - As such, I have a feeling it's probably not possible. Nothing is impossible. I guess you've never seen any ST demos. ;^) I have a sector editor called ZAP ST. It's interface is exactly like an Amigas. Yes, you gotta hold down the right button to get the damn menu up. No, I don't use it. -- Ed Krimen ............................................... ||| Video Production Major, California State University, Chico ||| INTERNET: ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu FREENET: al661 / | \ SysOp, Fuji BBS: 916-894-1261 FIDONET: 1:119/4.0
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) (12/27/90)
In article <1990Dec21.181322.11004@ecst.csuchico.edu> ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen) writes: >jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: > >- I've seen similar menus in Amiga programs. The menu bar is hidden >- until you click and then it appears at the top of the screen and >- menus drop down covering only part of the "work" area leaving the >- rest visible. This is particularly good for graphic programs of an >- artistic nature because, unlike Degas, it leaves as much of the >- "work" on-screen at all possible times. > >I kinda like the way Degas does things, right button to toggle >between drawing area and commands. Any way you slice it, the Degas >method or the hidden menus you described above, you still gotta hit >something. > >- If you're not an "artist" you may not realize why this is important >- at first, but if you've ever done extensive art it becomes a fairly >- obvious matter. > >Well, I don't [want to :^) ] consider myself an "artist," but I am Yeah. I can tell you're not an artist. No insult intended but no *real* artist -- ie person who is seriously trying to create a work of art, would agree with you unless they were strangely perverse. It is the drive inside the individual to create that work that *forces* an artist to draw or do whatever s/he does. If you don't have it, it's not likely you'll ever become an artist. I'm thinking in particular of some of my freinds in that regard more than me, though in some ways I'm "driven" too, though in different directions. That's not to say that it's impossible to create a great picture with Degas, for an artist you're working against the program rather than with it. It's like this: You're standing in front of your canvas with your "assistant" sitting beside you. Every time you want to change colours on your brush or think about picking up a different brush, he throws a blanket over your picture. . . . Then again there was the disappearing cursors. That was another "classic feature" of Degas. Degas was a "passable" program at a time when the only other program on the market was Neochrome. I hated Neochrome even worse, though thankfully, it's been so long since I used it that I've actually forgotten exactly what it was I didn't like about it. Hey Neato!!! A bad memory has its compensations! :-) Anyway, CyberPaint is the best program I've tried on the ST so far in this regard. Deluxe Paint may be better, but I haven't gotten around to trying it yet. >I've never understood the "Amiga-method" of calling up the drop-down >menus. Why should I have to hold down the right button? It's an With CyberPaint you don't "hold down the right button." You just click it to bring the menu bar up and click again to get rid of it. This is the best user interface for artwork that I've seen so far -- as I've said before. In fact, it's so good that I obtained Jim Kent's permission to copy the whole CyberPaint user interface for a paint program on another computer. That's an interesting story. I actually finished that program and it works. Jim Kent has a copy of it. Unfortunately, the computer I wrote it for was marginally popular and the negotiations for the distribution of the program died. 9 months of work went down the drain. Life'ls like that. . . . >awkward and unusual way, IMHO, of calling the menus. On the one hand you say you've used lots of paint programs. Yet you obviously don't know how CyberPaint works. And with that in mind you certainly feel yourself qualified to extoll Degas? Come on now, think a bit before you post! -- Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura
ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen) (01/01/91)
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: - That's not to say that it's impossible to create a great - picture with Degas, for an artist you're working against the program - rather than with it. It's like this: You're standing in front of - your canvas with your "assistant" sitting beside you. Every time - you want to change colours on your brush or think about picking up - a different brush, he throws a blanket over your picture. . . . A real artist must look down to his palette to change colors, right? So he's not always looking at his canvas. :^) Anyways, wouldn't a real artist have the image in his mind, so putting a blanket over the image wouldn't be so bad? Dunno. Like I said, I'm not a real artist. :^) - Then again there was the disappearing cursors. That was another - "classic feature" of Degas. Degas was a "passable" program at a - time when the only other program on the market was Neochrome. I - hated Neochrome even worse, though thankfully, it's been so long - since I used it that I've actually forgotten exactly what it was - I didn't like about it. Hey Neato!!! A bad memory has its - compensations! :-) Perhaps I should have been more specific to say "Degas Elite" instead of Degas. I've never used Degas. It was a mistake to bundle the two together. - Anyway, CyberPaint is the best program I've tried on the - ST so far in this regard. Deluxe Paint may be better, but I - haven't gotten around to trying it yet. I never regarded CyberPaint as a paint program, but more of a tool for animations. Now that you mention it, I guess it could be used as a paint program. - With CyberPaint you don't "hold down the right button." You - just click it to bring the menu bar up and click again to get rid of - it. This is the best user interface for artwork that I've seen - so far -- as I've said before. Have you used any of the paint programs on the Mac? Pixel Paint Professional is one I like (but it's on the Mac :^( ). It has many features that aren't on other programs, but like other drawing programs for the Mac your image is always on the screen, and you just change your tool or select your color by selecting one of the icons on the left. Or another way would be to have two screens, like with the Lumena, ArtStar, or Dubnar systems; one screen is for the commands and the other is for the image. Finally, TIPS and RIO also implement a nice interface with a menu that appears up over the image when you press the right mouse button or the stylus button. - In fact, it's so good that I obtained Jim Kent's permission to copy - the whole CyberPaint user interface for a paint program on another - computer. That's an interesting story. I actually finished that - program and it works. Jim Kent has a copy of it. Unfortunately, the - computer I wrote it for was marginally popular and the negotiations - for the distribution of the program died. 9 months of work went down - the drain. Life'ls like that. . . . Zoetrope on the Amiga seems to be exactly like CyberPaint. It was strange seeing it on an Amiga. - On the one hand you say you've used lots of paint programs. - Yet you obviously don't know how CyberPaint works. Well, I know how CyberPaint works. It's just that I never thought of it as a drawing program, but more of a coloring utility for animations. This discussion started about using the right mouse button in programs to bring up a menubar and just noted Degas as an example -- not that it was the premier drawing program. I guess it got a little out of hand. :^) -- Ed Krimen ............................................... ||| Video Production Major, California State University, Chico ||| INTERNET: ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu FREENET: al661 / | \ SysOp, Fuji BBS: 916-894-1261 FIDONET: 1:119/4.0
jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) (01/02/91)
In article <1991Jan01.015336.18335@ecst.csuchico.edu> ekrimen@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ed Krimen) writes: >jimomura@lsuc.on.ca (Jim Omura) writes: > >- That's not to say that it's impossible to create a great >- picture with Degas, for an artist you're working against the program >- rather than with it. It's like this: You're standing in front of >- your canvas with your "assistant" sitting beside you. Every time >- you want to change colours on your brush or think about picking up >- a different brush, he throws a blanket over your picture. . . . > >A real artist must look down to his palette to change colors, right? >So he's not always looking at his canvas. :^) Anyways, wouldn't a >real artist have the image in his mind, so putting a blanket over the >image wouldn't be so bad? Dunno. Like I said, I'm not a real artist. >:^) Look, if this is just some big joke to you, please stop posting to the Net at all. I don't have time to waste and I know a lot of other people who are likewise busy trying to earn a living, but are willing to take time to help each other by sharing their very valuable information. Now, on the chance that you really want to know the answer to your question, it's like this. "Changing colours" is not a single describable function for an artist. What an artist will do will depend on things like the medium in which he's working and the point at which he is working, but generally, no, you're wrong. Take an artist working with acrylics or oils and well advanced in a painting. S/he reaches a point where a detail is needed. The artist will probably lift up the palette to the work. It's obvious really. Why would an artist concerned with a precise colour want to guess what's on the brush or knife? On the other hand, I've seen artists take a tube and dab a colour straight onto a canvas and then work it around. But even then, you could say that the artist decided on the final colour mix while comparing it to the whole work. Chosing colours in that regard is never "in isolation" from the piece. I don't think you realize that the human vision system sees colours as a relative matter and not as an absolute. If your really interested, you should do some real research into it because I'm certainly not going to teach you the "carotine cycle" and current theories of how the brain works. But the bottom line is simple. An artist generally wants to see the work. >- Then again there was the disappearing cursors. That was another >- "classic feature" of Degas. Degas was a "passable" program at a >- time when the only other program on the market was Neochrome. I >- hated Neochrome even worse, though thankfully, it's been so long >- since I used it that I've actually forgotten exactly what it was >- I didn't like about it. Hey Neato!!! A bad memory has its >- compensations! :-) > >Perhaps I should have been more specific to say "Degas Elite" instead >of Degas. I've never used Degas. It was a mistake to bundle the two I used both. The disappearing cursor was never fixed. It's still a problem. By the time I bought CAD-3D version 2.0 I got really peeved with Tom Hudson. In both "upgrades" he never addressed the fundamental problems with either program. He just added more "features". In effect, his programs have long lists of "features" yet do little more than get in your way when you're trying to get things done. You know, to this day I have yet to find anybody who actually used CAD-3D to *create* an object. At most they used it to do a fancy render. But the "D" in the name of the program is supposed to mean "design", and refers to the creation of the objects. Anyway, I'm happier now with CyberSculpt. Be this is digressing again. . . . > >- Anyway, CyberPaint is the best program I've tried on the >- ST so far in this regard. Deluxe Paint may be better, but I >- haven't gotten around to trying it yet. > >I never regarded CyberPaint as a paint program, but more of a tool >for animations. Now that you mention it, I guess it could be used as >a paint program. Ironically, I've only done a bit of animation work with CyberPaint, but on the contrary, I've found it a *wonderful* paint environment. One of the fantastic advantages is that I can bundle a group of related pictures together in a single file which will load and unload all at once. Yup, most of my .SEQ files are *not* animation sequences at all, but simple bundles of related pictures. >- With CyberPaint you don't "hold down the right button." You >- just click it to bring the menu bar up and click again to get rid of >- it. This is the best user interface for artwork that I've seen >- so far -- as I've said before. > >Have you used any of the paint programs on the Mac? Pixel Paint >Professional is one I like (but it's on the Mac :^( ). It has many >features that aren't on other programs, but like other drawing >programs for the Mac your image is always on the screen, and you just >change your tool or select your color by selecting one of the icons on >the left. Or another way would be to have two screens, like with the >Lumena, ArtStar, or Dubnar systems; one screen is for the commands and >the other is for the image. Finally, TIPS and RIO also implement a >nice interface with a menu that appears up over the image when you >press the right mouse button or the stylus button. I've tried some Mac paint stuff casually, but I don't own a Mac. I couldn't tell you the names of what I tried. Overall, the main problem with the Mac programs is that because they are single button oriented, they tend to be cluttered. You generally work with the menu on the screen all the time. I don't want that. I want to see my picture. In effect, 1. I don't want menus on screen at all when I don't need them and 2. When I need a menu I want as little of the screen taken up by them as is possible, and definitely not obscuring the main part of my work unless unavoidable. Is there some point to this discussion? It's not helping me get my program done. >- In fact, it's so good that I obtained Jim Kent's permission to copy >- the whole CyberPaint user interface for a paint program on another >- computer. That's an interesting story. I actually finished that >- program and it works. Jim Kent has a copy of it. Unfortunately, the >- computer I wrote it for was marginally popular and the negotiations >- for the distribution of the program died. 9 months of work went down >- the drain. Life'ls like that. . . . > ... -- Jim Omura, 2A King George's Drive, Toronto, (416) 652-3880 lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura