On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 17:24 +0100, Jon Senior wrote:
> Just to present the opposing case.
> My workflow is:
> 1) Open raw image via the ufraw plugin.
> 2) Retouch as necessary, saving as xcf file.
> 3) Copy visible as new image
> 4) Resize new image for print or web + sharpen as neccessary.
> 5) Save result to jpeg file.
> I don't mind being warned that step 5 will result in a loss of data
> (although it'd be nice to be able to do the export silently). But I
> don't want to have to think about the processes required to export my
> image to a jpeg for publishing. I just want to do it and get back to
> editing my xcf file with its nice layers.
Sure, we all just want the computer do do what we want, without being
asked. But unfortunately mind-reading devices are not yet available. So
the only thing we can do is to ask you if you want to flatten the image
because you can't save it as a JPEG file as JPEG does not support
I am all for improving this situation. But so far no one has come up
with a good idea how this could be done. We can't just guess what the
user might want to do. If saving a multi-layered image as GIF, is she
trying to save an animation or has she forgotten to merge the layers? If
saving an image with transparency as a JPEG file, is that really the
correct background color so that automatically flattening the image will
give the desired result? IF saving an RGB image as GIF, does the user
just don't care about the conversion to Indexed Colors or has she
forgotten to do it?
PS: In your particular workflow, basically you are already doing the
export conversion yourself. What's breaking your workflow is the
fact that "Copy visible as new image" introduces an alpha channel.
To improve your workflow we should have a look at that and try to
figure out a way to avoid that.
Gimp-developer mailing list