Welcome to TVPaint Community forums !

I may be wrong, but here it looks to work perfectly in my case :

Elodie wrote:It's more a request than a bug (it's not because something does not work as you want that this behaviour is a bug).

+1 : no bug here.
It's a more a feature request.

at the moment, you can create different brushes for different uses/results.

Elodie wrote:I may be wrong, but here it looks to work perfectly in my case :

The attachment step_size.png is no longer available

but in your example you don't show the influence of the step value
which is considerable.
two brushstampdowns at 100% (so without downscaling) and without a stepdistance, are 1 pixel apart and have, relativly, a much bigger overlap then smaller (downscaled) brushstampdowns that are also 1 pixel apart
you could also say, at low step value, the larger sizes are relatively closer to each other and therefore more dark.

Peter explains it very well and you can see it in the image I posted previous and will post again here. In both Sketchbook and Photoshop, changing the size of the brush automatically changes the other parameters as well, notably the stepping. This means that any brush you design can be resized reliably. In TVPaint, I can't do that. I'm guessing that is an oversight, not a design feature. The work around is to redesign brushes for different sizes. Many factors need to be adjusted including wetness, opacity and even the whole design of the brush, just to get a thin line to match a thick line in look.

In my picture, line 2 is what TVPaint does when line 1 is reduced. It should look like line 3, which was reduced by grabbing line 1 and shrinking it down.

I get that this is not a bug, because a bug means software malfunctioning. I call this a design flaw which, in my view, is a critical one for people like me who are trying to use a particular line. It's is one of the huge draws of a bitmap program like TVPaint over vector software and as I say, Photoshop and Sketchbook recognize the need to adjust settings in proportion to the line size. Even if we could adjust the stepping below zero, then I could fix it myself. Maybe that's an easy fix? If it is, I would just love it if it could be done.

David_Fine wrote:As I play with this, it feels like it is the stepping which does not size down... The steps need to reduce with the brush, but how??

I'm not sure what the problem is with how you are defining your brush, but in my brush-making experience, I've set step size with an understanding that (when checked) the interval will always be a percentage of the BRUSH'S SIZE, meaning that if the brush size varies with pressure, then the step size will vary as well.

Please be careful in what changes you request about brush construction. There are literally thousands of custom brushes in use which were built using the current parameters. In all fairness, any changes in future brush definition should not impact those in any way.

Sven

I'm not talking about step size or line size varying with pressure, but resizing a line by reducing the size setting, so that you can use a brush at thickness A and then make a thinner version, B, which is identical, but thinner. Right now, TVPaint seems to be unique in not resizing the associated parameters and instead, you get a thinner brush which does not look at all like the thicker line brush (I'm only talking about anim brushes) and that's the problem. Any brush already made will not be impacted in any way if this problem is fixed. I'm just amazed that it has never been raised as an issue before (I think) as it seems to me to be a key function to be able to resize a line reliably and simply. As I say, this works in other graphic apps like Photoshop and Sketchbook and I mention that only to draw attention to the fact that this is considered the default way to resize a brush there, so why not here? Has no one ever noticed this problem? For my line work, I desperately need this fixed or some kind of work around that will do a similar thing.

Fabrice or Elodie, if you have a chance to download my brush posted earlier in this thread and see if you can make smaller versions which look the same, I would be most grateful. If nothing else, you will see the issue I am raising here first hand.

Thanks!

Peter Wassink wrote:...
but in your example you don't show the influence of the step value
which is considerable.
two brushstampdowns at 100% (so without downscaling) and without a stepdistance, are 1 pixel apart and have, relativly, a much bigger overlap then smaller (downscaled) brushstampdowns that are also 1 pixel apart
you could also say, at low step value, the larger sizes are relatively closer to each other and therefore more dark.

brush.png

So, would it be a solution to have the stepping increase a little more than the brush would if you were scaling down the brush? So that when the brushsize scales down linearly the stepping would increase somewhat exponentially?

Okay, I tried a little further and this seemed to help somewhat;

I doubled the X-Y proportions over the the Y-axis in the brush that's at 50%, like this:



And it gave me this result:



To me the 50% brush looks closer to Dave's Sketchbook brush. What do you think?
It seems to me that an added option to change the X-Y proportions of a brush linked to its size might do the trick...

Perhaps an added button to the Custom Brush panel "XY Proportion" with a pull down like the other ones ("Size" and "Opacity")? Or is that too much of an overhaul?

Here are both TVP brushes from the example above:

Well, this is very, very interesting. Thank you so much, Sewie. It appears to me that doubling the height of the brush seems to make the steps closer together, since the brush is thinner. That is, it has the effect of reducing the step spacing and so fixing the line. It is a workaround because it is not fully accurate, but a very good one. I find that as I decrease the line further, it again loses quality, so I have to adjust other settings like wetness, opacity and the step, maybe turning step off. It does give me a good approximation so this is great news.

Still, it would make so much sense of the software figured all this out by itself, or at least gave a setting in the Edit menu to choose to do that. Hey Fabrice, any chance of that? I guess I should post in the feature request section.

By the way, Sewie, I note you changed the brush from an anim to one single image and let the brush rotate in a loop. Why did you feel it was better to not use the anim? Both seem to work, but I had thought that the anim gave me more control over how the brush turns.

David_Fine wrote:...
Still, it would make so much sense of the software figured all this out by itself, or at least gave a setting in the Edit menu to choose to do that. Hey Fabrice, any chance of that? I guess I should post in the feature request section.

I agree. I really think the custombrush panel and settings could use some more love to make it able to compete with other current graphics programs. The brush engine is great but I would like to have some some more options and control over the behavior of the brushes. Settings that are easily adjustable and not workarounds.

By the way, Sewie, I note you changed the brush from an anim to one single image and let the brush rotate in a loop. Why did you feel it was better to not use the anim? Both seem to work, but I had thought that the anim gave me more control over how the brush turns.

I was going to try an animbrush next. I mostly prefer to see if I can find the solution within a single stamp brush because that is somewhat simpler to oversee with all the settings and whatnot. Also it's more friendly for your processor making the brush more responsive. And it's not a loop btw, the Anim setting is on 'Loop' but because it isn't an animbrush that setting has no effect. I just forgot to reset it.

I have moved this topic in the Feature Requests section.

There's a lot of interesing feedback, we can't promise we will implement everything soon, but we'll keep a close eye on this topic

Thank you Thierry. I truly hope this might be able to be addressed sooner than later because I am really having a hard time getting this brush to be consistent when it is reduced to a thinner drawing line and this is a huge problem for me. This fix would benefit everyone who designs their own brushes and could be an option in the edit panel for those who, for whatever reason, prefer it the old, inconsistent way.

One further note, as Sewie explains, using a single brush stamp is more efficient and less memory intensive, but there is only one option for random and that is why I need to make an anim. If I could control how it randomizes a single brush image, it would mean that I never have to make an anim brush at all, unless I wanted each and every stamp to be totally different. Controlling the anim could mean to rotate it only around one side, so 180 degrees, or 90 degrees, so that it is just turning a little, but randomly. This means that a brush image which is uneven will always paint a line in the same uneven way within the random parameter setting. This would most certainly be a part 2 request as the first thing is far more important, but this part would make a huge difference as well in terms of brushes which are easier to use and create and resize without impacting on memory as much and creating drawing lag, which you sometimes get with anim brushes.

Sewie, I have great results in larger lines, but as I get the line thin and continue to play around with settings, it still has a crumbly look which is not as nice as the large version shrunk down. One work around is to work at 4k resolution and thus use a thicker line, which will appear thinner at 4K and so look better when output at 1080, but that means I have to make every scene I am doing really huge. Quite a big workaround! If you come up with anything else, anim brush wise, that would be great. Once again, thank you so much for your help with this. Really appreciate it.

Thank you, Dave. It was mostly done thanks to your good detective work.
I'll fiddle around some more with the brushes if I find the time.

BTW this thread has a double in the Technical Support section.

David_Fine wrote:If I could control how it randomizes a single brush image, it would mean that I never have to make an anim brush at all, unless I wanted each and every stamp to be totally different. Controlling the anim could mean to rotate it only around one side, so 180 degrees, or 90 degrees, so that it is just turning a little, but randomly.

If I understood your request well, I think you can already :
http://www.tvpaint.com/doc/tvp11/index. ... es&lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
check the "Angle and Random" chapter on this webpage.