I haven't seen adamc's work on the default set of dockers, but boud suggested people share their opinions on the forums, so... here they are!

Basically, as I see it there are three main things to aim for:

1. Making commonly used tools quickly available
2. New users to discover new useful tools
3. Vertical space efficiency for users of smaller screens

Given these criteria, I suggest this setup for the following reasons:
(this image shows the docker column on a 1024x768 screen)

• Tool options (The most commonly used docker, therefore reason 1)
• Small colour selector (reason 1 and 3)
• Layers (reason 1)
• Add shape (reason 2 - You *know* many people will be looking for "the text tool" etc)

Any feedback?


PS: I'd also love to see the following default gradient / pattern / colours as bright colourful gradients/patterns up the top on open where the rest of the UI is almost all greyscale, stands out and looks less professional.

Proposed:


No-so-good, overly bright 1980's version:

imo the triangular colour selector is the best and therefore i've put it in my set of dockers. i have a big monitor and i didn't realize, that space is such a concern. i don't have any stats, but one could argue, that artists have a big monitor anyway and rather people with small monitors should have to edit the dockers, than people with big monitors.

anyway, if space is a big concern, i would work on the general ui to use less. i've modified my set in the meanwhile, so that's not the original one, but if added red lines in areas, where i think, that space is lost (left and right from the colour selector is only lost, if it is smaller than usual).

(notice, that this is the whole window including toolbar and statusbar)

Grin... One reason for insisting on 1024x768 is that my tablet pc has that resolution, and I want to use it with Krita! But the main reason for trying to get as compact a docker layout as possible by default is that the layers docker can use most of the remaining space. A second reason for the current layout is to look like Krita 1.x (and Photoshop) by default -- though we have a bug in that not all tool option widgets are shown by default on top. That's a Qt/KOffice-wide issue though.

My preferred layout would be:

[navigator (broken right now) | tool options]
[shapes|color|palettes (broken right now)]
[painterly mixer|layers]

Which shouldn't be a surprise since that's more or less what it's now

Another related thing: this weekend I was at the KPresenter meeting and we discussed the text shape, and I'm not sure whether I used to argue for or against having a Text tool in the toolbox, but I'm leaning towards proposing to have a text creation tool in the toolbox, like we have a path tool. But that will likely create a bit of a stir in the KOffice community.

boudewijn wrote:I'm leaning towards proposing to have a text creation tool in the toolbox, like we have a path tool.

Definitely. It may not be the "Koffice way", but it is absolutely the way that the vast majority of users will expect.

Kubuntiac wrote:

boudewijn wrote:I'm leaning towards proposing to have a text creation tool in the toolbox, like we have a path tool.

Definitely. It may not be the "Koffice way", but it is absolutely the way that the vast majority of users will expect.

ack

A second reason for the current layout is to look like Krita 1.x (and Photoshop) by default

imo we don't need to resemble krita 1 or photoshop. i believe, that users would get used to another layout quite fast. so i would go just for what we think is the most usable configuration.

i would go just for what we think is the most usable configuration.

Absolutely. Presenting common operations where they are easily accessible and expected just happens to help create a usable configuration.

Kubuntiac wrote:PS: I'd also love to see the following default gradient / pattern / colours as bright colourful gradients/patterns up the top on open where the rest of the UI is almost all greyscale, stands out and looks less professional.

Proposed:

I agree, plus the black/white gradient is the most used, so it makes sense to set it by default.

boudewijn wrote:My preferred layout would be:

[navigator (broken right now) | tool options]
[shapes|color|palettes (broken right now)]
[painterly mixer|layers]

It's my prefered too. I'd just add to that the Style docker.
I think we must not hesitate to add many dockers in tabs. It shows krita's possibilities to begginers (and journalists!). And it's easier to close one uneeded docker than to explore every dockers.Plus not all users knows that you can add docker in the begginning.

We should also think about default when others tools are used for the first time too. For example,
-the "Default" tool call the Arrange, Geometry and Snapping dockers that can take a lot of space. I think these three should be tabbed together.
-When you draw path, there is a high change you want to change its width, so the Stroke docker should be visible.

boudewijn wrote:Another related thing: this weekend I was at the KPresenter meeting and we discussed the text shape, and I'm not sure whether I used to argue for or against having a Text tool in the toolbox, but I'm leaning towards proposing to have a text creation tool in the toolbox, like we have a path tool. But that will likely create a bit of a stir in the KOffice community.

I'm for it.
I never understood the separation between tools and shapes. It seems articifial to me. If it was up to me, I'd merge everything (same for style docker vs. color selectors).

some proposition for merging tools/shapes :

1.Import all shapes as tool. Merge them into a pop-up icon by type (primitives, text, arrows, used made, downloaded via GHNS,...) when there is too many icons.
advantage :
- the workflow is similar to using the Add Shape docker, but it takes less space.
-The control of visible shapes is more finely grained, and choosen by the user.
-The UI is more consistent.
disadvantage :
- Drag&Drop impossible ?
- Some bitmap tools will need to be put in pop-up too so that icons still fit in a two columns docker.

2. Only import as tool shapes that are equivalent to bitmap tools (square, circle...)and text shapes. So that there is a symmetry.

3. Divide out tool/shapes into mini-tool-dockers (bitmap, transform, vector primitives, vector drawing, selections,...):
advantage:
-you can adapt tools to your workflow.
disadvantage:
-It would takes time to change the GUI layout.
Following the same idea, the tool docker could be a configurable toolbar.

4. Allow the "Shapes" docker to be 2 columns large. Dock it behind the tool docker.

My preference goes to 1. The easiest to do is probably 4.

Currently it's impossible to draw a shape with the brush and drawing shapes in general is very slow.

both certainly won't be fixed at least until 2.3, but imo the integration of vector tools needs much more work, otherwise it feels somehow unfinished/unloved. i like (1) too..

Actually, whether working with shapes is very slow or not is mainly a function of the graphics card or the system it seems. On my laptops, working with shapes isn't even much slower than using Karbon.

For small shape Krita speed is close to Karbon. With bigger shapes Krita get slower and slower.