(Damn it, why doesn't this mailing list have a proper reply-to address?)

From: strata_ran...@hotmail.com
To: cr33...@gmail.com
Subject: RE: [Gimp-user] Calm and rational Save/Export workflow report ;)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 08:19:21 -0700





I have personally encountered this type of case a number of times myself -- 
when an image is 'dirty' (unsaved changes), exporting to another format does 
NOT reset the image state back to 'clean' again, even if there was no data to 
be lost with the chosen file format.  As a result, GIMP asks if you wish to 
save any changes (in XCF) when you quit.

This is annoying and a minor hindrance to non-XCF workflows.  In your case 
specifically, it also poses a very real risk of losing a lot of potential XCF 
data when you exit.  But I am not sure it can be necessarily fixed.

-- Stratadrake
strata_ran...@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.


> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 16:14:25 -0500
> From: cr33...@gmail.com
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: [Gimp-user] Calm and rational Save/Export workflow report ;)
> 
> Hi,
> 
> To quickly outline today's workflow:
> 
> The final output I need is a TIFF with 1-bit indexing, and the source is a 
> JPEG.
> 
> In detail:
> 
> 1. Open JPEG with GIMP
> 2. Do some masking, etc.
> 3. Save as XCF
> 4. Some more masking, tweaking, etc.
> 5. Save
> 6. Flatten, convert to 1-bit indexed
> 7. Export TIFF
> 8. Close image
> 
> On 8, I get the warning about discarding changes - which of course I
> ignore to keep the info saved in step 5.  I need to keep the XCF in
> either color or greyscale with extra layers/paths/etc but I also need
> to produce a flattened 1-bit image before exporting as TIFF.  So I'm
> going to see (and ignore) the warning with this sort of project.  I
> guess I could do a 'Save As' and name it something like
> 'myproject_flat.xcf' after step 6, but it would be a useless file - I
> would never need it.
> 
> I'm not arguing either for or against the 2.8 behavior - just pointing
> out at least one use case that has (seemingly) slipped through the
> specification.
> 
> Thoughts?  No flame wars please :)
> 
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-user-list mailing list
> gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
                                                                                
  
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Reply via email to