Frank Gore wrote:
>>> But a much better and simpler idea is to just use a
>>> number range from 1..13, similar to photoshop.
>>> I'll take that over to the developer's list.
> I disagree, I think Photoshop's way of displaying the JPG compression
> slider is ridiculous. You can move the slider back and forth within a
> very wide range before the corresponding number changes. And since the
> slider doesn't spring back to a pre-determined spot on the line, that
> means one could select a different grade of "level 8" depending on
> where the slider is positioned. You can actually see this by looking
> at the file size. If I select the lower range of "level 8", the file
> is smaller than if I pick the higher range of "level 8".

I fully agree that this is bad design.
If there are interstages of say, 8.0  8.25  8.5 and 8.75,
those clearly have to be displayed.


Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to