On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 8:30 PM, daniel wrote:

> Is there any reason you skipped over the part about the damage caused by
> deviations from the accepted standard for user interface behavior and how it
> affects not only the user work flow in GiMP but also in other programs a
> user may use at the same time?

Yes, there is a reason. I'm bored to death explaining that this is not
a deviation. But since you are specifically asking about it...

GIMP is targeted at workflows that involve multilayered projects,
masks, paths etc. If you pick pretty much any serious digital media
production tool that combines bits of data inside, you'll see that it
only saves to its native file format and maybe to a few exchange file
formats such as AAF or OMF.

Compositing software such as Nuke or Ramen? Check.
Digital audio workstations such as Logic or Ardour? Check.
Non-linear video editors such as Premiere or Kdenlive? Check.

Do their provide optional saving behavior? Check.

I've already heard people coming with professional background in media
production wondering, why folks make all this fuzz about save/export.
Because the change makes sense to them, and it's exactly the kind of
people we are targeting.

And targeting a certain group of people (or, rather, their workflows)
doesn't mean that we hate other groups of users and their workflows or
neglect them. The whole secondary workflow was designed to address the
needs of people who want to just save changes back to the original
file. This is how we "hate" you.

> We've gone from "it seemed like a good idea at the time" to "it's too late
> to change, the decision has been made."

_We_ haven't.

Alexandre Prokoudine
gimp-user-list mailing list

Reply via email to