Undo?

[NDean]

on the topic of the undo function. I know it is nice sometimes to be barred from being able to undo what you've done. However, from the short time I've been using Alchemy, I've found it really frustrating when I've had an image I liked and I've gone to add to it some more, but I've disliked the shape of the new stroke or on the random shape functions it's given me a huge abstract shape that covers the section I liked.
I think it would be nice to be able to step back at least one stage if you've done a stroke you really don't like.

Its all about getting a balance, which is very difficult with this sort of experimental software

[tehmeh]

Don't ever add undo or history features! Ruins any point of the program, at the moment it's very wabi sabi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi) and when I haven't quite learnt a tool and make a mistake, if it needs correcting then what I do after is always even better

[NDean]

Don't ever add undo or history features! Ruins any point of the program, at the moment it's very wabi sabi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi) and when I haven't quite learnt a tool and make a mistake, if it needs correcting then what I do after is always even better

Richard R. Powell summarizes by saying "It (wabi-sabi) nurtures all that is authentic by acknowledging three simple realities: nothing lasts, nothing is finished, and nothing is perfect."

I love it!

[dave nielsen]

My two cents on this:

Personally, I think some sort of History/branching is a good extension of the program. It provides more ease of iterations, etc. Add the undo/history/whatever option as a toggle.

The ones who want it can have it toggled on. The ones who want their lines in indelible ink so they don't futz with the same design decisions all day keep it off. Personally I would use the program differently at different times.

All it takes is the discipline to keep the "History toggle" off to make the restriction useful. And leaving that up to the user is better than hamstringing everyone who wants it.

[NDean]

My two cents on this:

Personally, I think some sort of History/branching is a good extension of the program. It provides more ease of iterations, etc. Add the undo/history/whatever option as a toggle.

The ones who want it can have it toggled on. The ones who want their lines in indelible ink so they don't futz with the same design decisions all day keep it off. Personally I would use the program differently at different times.

All it takes is the discipline to keep the "History toggle" off to make the restriction useful. And leaving that up to the user is better than hamstringing everyone who wants it.

It is about self-control on this one. If you dont like it turn it off. History feature is far more alchemy-like than undo however.

[kollatt]

i keep seeing this topic pop up again and again and the one thing that people say repeatedly is that they get frustrated when they're working on an image and it's becoming something they really like and then suddenly it gets ruined. to me this means that people are going in with the intention of carefully preserving what they are working on so it won't get lost. this is attachment. i think alchemy is about letting go of attachment and understanding the process of creating something simply for the sake of creating it. philosophy aside however ( and i love that this program can start conversations just like this, which to me is another great reason NOT to implement undo ), sessions is alchemy's failsafe. it appears to me that people don't properly use their sessions options, because if they did this frustration would never take place. i use alchemy on an almost daily basis for work and i have to say that if i'm feeling at all like i want to work in a state of preservation i simply set my sessions to record quickly and never look back. with the recently added option of being able to load previous sessions back into alchemy if you're really set on creating a final piece in alchemy or detailing something a bit more it's not at all difficult. personally if i create something that i would really like to explore on it's own then i move it into photoshop. to me this is all a very straightforward issue. do not allow undo. it's something unique that sets alchemy apart and is at the core of it's original philosophy. if we choose to ignore alchemy's core ideas then it will very quickly lose it's identity and fall into line with other drawing software.

[inverse catheter]

i keep seeing this topic pop up again and again and the one thing that people say repeatedly is that they get frustrated when they're working on an image and it's becoming something they really like and then suddenly it gets ruined. to me this means that people are going in with the intention of carefully preserving what they are working on so it won't get lost. this is attachment. i think alchemy is about letting go of attachment and understanding the process of creating something simply for the sake of creating it. philosophy aside however ( and i love that this program can start conversations just like this, which to me is another great reason NOT to implement undo ), sessions is alchemy's failsafe. it appears to me that people don't properly use their sessions options, because if they did this frustration would never take place. i use alchemy on an almost daily basis for work and i have to say that if i'm feeling at all like i want to work in a state of preservation i simply set my sessions to record quickly and never look back. with the recently added option of being able to load previous sessions back into alchemy if you're really set on creating a final piece in alchemy or detailing something a bit more it's not at all difficult. personally if i create something that i would really like to explore on it's own then i move it into photoshop. to me this is all a very straightforward issue. do not allow undo. it's something unique that sets alchemy apart and is at the core of it's original philosophy. if we choose to ignore alchemy's core ideas then it will very quickly lose it's identity and fall into line with other drawing software.

well put

the undo topic is of course very hot. and we certainly respect peoples preference to have it included. good talk

[Jack the R]

I remember when Ton didn't feel like Blender needed undo - but ultimately undo carried the day and Blender is much better for it IMO.

Undo is possibly the most revolutionary feature computers gave artist - not having it is a step backwards. Besides, no one is being forced to hit the undo key. Learning what mistakes you can work with and which ones need to be backtracked is part of being an artist.

Personally I feel like ruling out editing tools will prove to be a mistake. I can already tell how useful it would be to pan the canvas over, or zoom, or grab a shape and move it elsewhere . . .

I'm wondering if Alchemy wouldn't have been better as part of GIMP's brush engine. Then it could take advantage of code already written for GIMP. For example, the mirror function would be better if you could define the mirror line. Like, grab a guide and mirror around that.

[moth3r]

Implementation of the Undo function is a must! I understand and I like the random power of the Al.chemy UI but I would like to have much more control over it. Artist should decide what is good or wrong and not the program or random function itself. If I did not like the result, I should have a way to go back. Programs without undo function are not user friendly. I believe that my standpoint is statistically correct as well. On example, I cannot even search this forum just using the "undo" word because it is already to much in use. I guess, because of too many requests.

Anyway, I am already very grateful for Alchemy and I thank the people behind the development. Therefore, I post my feedback and I see the way how it can be improved beyond great.

Regards,
Ivan

[kollatt]

once again, i think people are ignoring the sessions option in alchemy. it's the software's answer to an undo feature, and using sessions instead of undo creates a very different workflow that is quite organic and forward moving. another reason to not implement undo is that it would make alchemy a heavier program, requiring that it keep history of past strokes. alchemy is a nice lightweight program and should stay that way as much as possible. i really believe that alchemy sets itself aside because of a certain design philosophy that is associated with it. this path will ultimately lead to it attempting to be a basic vector drawing/editing application like adobe illustrator. please do not add this feature! keep undo out of alchemy!