Keep image marks while merging layers Topic is solved

[NathanOtano]

I would like to keep my image marks while i'm merging two layers

Like pixels, uppers image marks will erase lower image marks if there is two image marks at the same frame.

Nathan

[schwarzgrau]

A GIANT +1 from me ( http://forum.tvpaint.com/viewtopic.php? ... 073#p84073 )
This is the only reason I often got more layers then I would like to have: If I merge them I loose all image marks.

[D.T. Nethery]

+1

[schwarzgrau]

Is this something the TVPaint developers consider useful ?

[Fabrice]

It is, but :

Like pixels, uppers image marks will erase lower image marks if there is two image marks at the same frame.

Before doing a choice that can't be reverted, this point needs to be debated.
Some people might want a different behavior.

[schwarzgrau]

Another possibility would be something like a checkbox in the preferences, where you can choose if it should prefer upper or lower image marks. For me, it is only important that I could merge two layers (usually a pretty long one and a tiny one on top for stuff like secondary actions) without loosing all the marks.

[NathanOtano]

It is, but :

Like pixels, uppers image marks will erase lower image marks if there is two image marks at the same frame.

Before doing a choice that can't be reverted, this point needs to be debated.
Some people might want a different behavior.

This is also the behaviour I would expect. I don't see any other way of doing it and it's the natural way the pixels work the same way, when you merge two layers it's the one on top that remains.

I don't think adding an option is usefull. I think we will sometimes need to change the layer positions before merging, depending on the merging we need, so one way or another is the same. And I think in most cases image marks doesn't overlaps, or they are exactly the same so keeping the marks from one layer or another doesn't matter.

[schwarzgrau]

I guess Nathan is right. The upper layers should overwrite the underlying layers image marks on the spot, where they overlap. If you don't want them to be overwritten you can always remove all image marks from the layer above, before merging.

[Elodie]

This is also the behaviour I would expect. I don't see any other way of doing it and it's the natural way the pixels work the same way, when you merge two layers it's the one on top that remains.

If you follow that logic, 2 images marks placed at the same "image" on 2 separated layers should merge and blend their colours, which is obviously impossible.

If you don't want them to be overwritten you can always remove all image marks from the layer above, before merging.

And if we follow that logic (top layer = layer whose we will keep image mark for merge), your merged layers won't have any mark image, since the top layer has no marks.

[schwarzgrau]

If you follow that logic, 2 images marks placed at the same "image" on 2 separated layers should merge and blend their colours, which is obviously impossible.

No If you got a drawing and paint something on the layer above and merge those layers the color of the pixels of the top layer got used (except for special blending modes). While the transparent pixels on the top layer doesn't affect the pixels on the bottom layer.

I did a mockup how I would like this merge to work (and if I understood Nathan, he asks for the same behavior)

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you got a top and a bottom layer with image marks on them and merge them the result is a mixture of the image marks, preferring the top ones and ignoring the empty ones (like transparent pixels)

MergeExample01.png (31.36 KiB) Viewed 48820 times

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Following that logic if your top layer got no image marks ( = all pixels are transparent) you keep the all image marks on the bottom layer

MergeExample02.png (27.6 KiB) Viewed 48820 times

[Elodie]

Ok, thank you for that explanation.

[schwarzgrau]

Sorry for keep asking, but is this something for the to-do list or something which still needs discussing ?

[NathanOtano]

I confirm that it's what I am expecting, thanks for the images

[Mads Juul]

I agree with Swartzgrau and Nathan. The logical would be that the top imagemark overwrites the imagemaarks underneath.
This would be the effect I would expect.
-Mads

[Elodie]

Ok, so let's to do list it !