Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Question about paths
There is some sort of inconsistent behaviour that i'd like to understand.

If i make a drawing in Inkscape, there are no layers unless i create them.
When i draw something in Illustrator, part of shapes are automatically on different layers.

When i import a path i made in Inkscape into Gimp, it creates a bunch of path-layers for different parts, that werent existent in Inkscape.

Why is that ?
Well, in the open SVG dialog Gimp gives you the option to merge all the paths into one.

Next, there are cases where you would want separate path elements (to create selections for instance) and since Gimp makes it a lot easier to merge paths than to split them, splitting them by default is the better option, even if there is possibly a good case to have one option with one Gimp path per layer.

Can't answer the Inkscape v.s. Illustrator question.
Im aware of the merging option in Gimp. Alternatively, i could just 'Union' everything in Inkscape.

Actually i like what Gimp is doing to my path, i was just wondering, why it does so.

Would be great if Inkscape had the same bevaviour.
GIMP doesn't support compound paths natively, so every path or shape is a separate unit.

Forum Jump: