peter sikking schrieb:
> I must also point out that this save + export change is also a
> change in attitude for GIMP. it clearly supports that our high-end
> users work in no-loss xcf all the time (if they want to store
> results) and that also means avoiding doing things like merging,
> flattening, applying masks, reducing colours. that is all part of
> the export scenario.

what about using the same mechanism for export as it
is planned for managing the GEGL tree?
I'm referring to http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/GEGL_analysed,
especially your quote "ah, GEGL will solve that".

That means for the user, all export functionality could be represented
by a tiny GEGL tree/list which provides operations for flattening,
color reduction, background creation, writing files and so on.
This tree gets executed anytime the user exports her image.

The first time the user exports something, he has to choose between
- automatic conversion, which follows the principle of least surprise and 
  a default GEGL tree
- manual conversion, thereby building the list step by step. If the user forgets
  something, a dialog offers to create the missing steps, very similar to
  the current behaviour.

The cool thing is, all the complexity of image conversion is represented in
a fashion the user is already accustomed to.
And the user can easily customize the export process. I'm thinking here of a
photo workflow, where multiple versions of an image with different amounts of
resizing and sharpening have to be exported. Just add these steps to your 
'export tree/list'.

The items in the list should have a checkbox 'ask me every time'
(for adjusting jpeg compression etc.)


PS: Not shure if the export tree should be presented separately or
wether it can be merged with the main tree

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to