Rob Antonishen wrote:
Read this with intrest (as a user) what is the intrinsic difference
between save a copy and save as? I am assuming the working document
changes in the save as case to the new saved as file. In the save a
copy case I assume the working doment is unchanged.
yes it works
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 11:50 +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
Does this mean that the annoying pop-up asking If I want to export
will go away if I choose export?
The dialog does not really ask you if you want to export. It informs you
that the image can't be saved because the format you have
Quoting peter sikking pe...@mmiworks.net:
we have discussed this intensely before, the ambiguity of what you
really
got in your document window after opening--or saving to--a non-GIMP-type
image (e.g. jpeg, png).
:
:
So here is a short spec:
On Friday 06 March 2009, Sven Neumann wrote:
So we probably need to add specific actions to save a layer, a
channel or a layer mask.
If that (plus to save all of a kind, e.g. all layers) could go into the
generic save dialog, we would have another 10% questions less on irc :)
Daniel
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 07:33 -0500,
saulgo...@flashingtwelve.brickfilms.com wrote:
I also think that it must be possible to export to GIMP file types.
This is necessary so that more than one version of GIMP data files can
be supported. (ie, GIMP 4.0 might still need to create GIMP 2.x
Sven wrote:
Alexia wrote:
Does this mean that the annoying pop-up asking If I want to export
will go away if I choose export?
The dialog does not really ask you if you want to export. It informs
you
that the image can't be saved because the format you have chosen can
not
handle some
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 14:17 +0100, peter sikking wrote:
right. one thing I have no overview of is how many ‘topics’
there are for which there are dialogs. Up to now I have seen
layers, transparency, bit-depths.
Let's have a look at the capabilities that the save plug-ins announce:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Sven Neumann s...@gimp.org wrote:
This results in a variety of possible dialogs:
And? If I save to a format it can be assumed that I know its limitations.
Being warned once about the information loss is good enough. Mind, gimp does
not even do that right now.
great this gets tracked down.
One minor suggestion, a simple renaming:
Export...= Export as...
Save back= Export
this way, 'Export' resembles 'Save' as a one-click-action
and 'Export as...' parallels 'Save as'.
Additionally, the association between 'Save' and safe is kept
oops, just recognized i'm replicating a previous post, sorry
yahvuu schrieb:
One minor suggestion, a simple renaming:
Export...= Export as...
Save back= Export
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
yahvuu wrote:
One minor suggestion, a simple renaming:
Export...= Export as...
Save back= Export
this way, 'Export' resembles 'Save' as a one-click-action
and 'Export as...' parallels 'Save as'.
That sounds good to me. Save back would be something I've never seen in any
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Sven Neumann s...@gimp.org wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 17:37 +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
And? If I save to a format it can be assumed that I know its
limitations. Being warned once about the information loss is good
enough.
That is not what GIMP is
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:03 +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
Why would I convert it beforehand? Why would a user need to do a bunch
of actions that serve no purpose, are mostly 100% automatic and even
hinder when I want to follow the export action up with a native save?
Because they are not
Hi,
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)
Apologies. I think I hit reply, not reply-all.
On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:40:36 +0100
Sven Neumann s...@gimp.org wrote:
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
I posted this as a bug, and was told by Sven Neumann the behaviour was
intentional and to raise it here.
Currently, when saving a selection to a channel, either using the UI
or via the PDB, the active drawable gets changed from the working
layer to the new channel.
I believe the active drawable
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:46 -0500, Rob Antonishen wrote:
I posted this as a bug, and was told by Sven Neumann the behaviour was
intentional and to raise it here.
Thanks for bringing this discussion to the mailing-list.
The current behaviour is confusing to a user because of the following
Hi!!!
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Rob Antonishen
rob.antonis...@gmail.com wrote:
I posted this as a bug, and was told by Sven Neumann the behaviour was
intentional and to raise it here.
Currently, when saving a selection to a channel, either using the UI
or via the PDB, the active
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 17:40 +0100, Sven Neumann wrote:
[...]
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.
We could do better than today. E.g. export to tiff should be probably
That might not have been the best example.
A guess a more useful example would be that after building a
complicated selection to isolate a portion of an image (say the sky)
the user wants to save that selection, then modify the entire image
(say gamma correction, or colour balance, even
20 matches
Mail list logo
