Hello,
The last discussion about using CIE LCH for some layer modes made me
remember that there is a CIE LCH color selector plugin for GIMP that
many people would like to see included in the main GIMP distribution
sooner or later. It has room for improvements (for example when colors
out of
Hi Martin,
On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 01:58:20PM +0200, Martin Nordholts wrote:
On 08/02/2009 01:50 PM, Roman Joost wrote:
does not change the fact that it would be nice to have a
'property-changed' signal as a convenience if you have the need to
listen property changes
So ... I'm just
On 08/03/2009 10:45 AM, SHIRAKAWA Akira wrote:
Hello,
The last discussion about using CIE LCH for some layer modes made me
remember that there is a CIE LCH color selector plugin for GIMP that
many people would like to see included in the main GIMP distribution
sooner or later.
Before we add
Martin Nordholts wrote:
Before we add support for picking device-independent colors, the whole
color selector should be color managed, and it currently isn't. I'm all
for adding a Lab/LCH color picker when that is fixed though.
Ah, I see, thanks anyway for checking it out.
By the way, as I
On 08/03/2009 05:07 PM, SHIRAKAWA Akira wrote:
Martin Nordholts wrote:
Before we add support for picking device-independent colors, the whole
color selector should be color managed, and it currently isn't.
by
not color managed did you refer to this specific implementation of a
LCH color
Martin Nordholts wrote:
I'm referring to the whole GIMP color picking system. The color picked
using the default color picker is not represented in a
device-independent way. One of the consequences is that painting with a
green brush on a color managed image might not give a green stroke
On 08/03/2009 05:44 PM, SHIRAKAWA Akira wrote:
Can you give a rough estimate of when a color managed picking system
will be integrated into GIMP ?
Making the color picker color managed has not been incorporated in any
short or long term plan yet. So yeah, maybe we will get around to do it
in
Hi,
On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 17:41 +, Omari Stephens wrote:
More specifically, once I hit Ctrl+E and see the status message not saying
anything about exporting, I expect the file to have been saved. If GIMP
thinks
there were no changes, it should say no changes to save in a way that is
On Monday 03 August 2009 22:20:29 Sven Neumann wrote:
On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 17:41 +, Omari Stephens wrote:
More specifically, once I hit Ctrl+E and see the status message not
saying anything about exporting, I expect the file to have been saved.
If GIMP thinks there were no changes, it
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 13:10 +0200, Martin Nordholts wrote:
What is the migration time? You would have to deal with this on each and
every start of GIMP. System resources may have changed, due to a minor
or micro GIMP update or because the system maintainer added or removed
resource
On 08/03/2009 09:33 PM, Sven Neumann wrote:
GIMP has done it the way you proposed in the past and copied system
resources to the user directory. This was ugly and caused lots of grief.
Eventually we got rid of this mess and now you are proposing to undo
this work and to reintroduce this
Hi,
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 15:12 +1000, Roman Joost wrote:
I could and the patch provided by that bug adds a custom
'property-changed' signal. Sven and Mitch thought, if I inherit from
XMPModel, I wouldn't really need the 'property-changed' signal, because
I'd be able to control the
On 08/03/2009 03:28 PM, Alexia Death wrote:
On Monday 03 August 2009 22:20:29 Sven Neumann wrote:
On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 17:41 +, Omari Stephens wrote:
More specifically, once I hit Ctrl+E and see the status message not
saying anything about exporting, I expect the file to have been saved.
Hi,
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 15:51 -0400, Jay Smith wrote:
While maybe 5 seconds might be a little quick, conceptually I agree that
it should not last very long. Maybe 8 or 10 seconds or even 15 seconds.
But not longer.
Maybe five seconds is indeed somewhat short. Would anyone object if we
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 15:51 -0400, Jay Smith wrote:
While maybe 5 seconds might be a little quick, conceptually I agree that
it should not last very long. Maybe 8 or 10 seconds or even 15 seconds.
But not longer.
Maybe five seconds is indeed somewhat short.
On 08/03/2009 05:04 PM, gg wrote:
snip lots
It is NOT an effective way of displaying important error messages that
NEED to be seen.
As I said in my original post , this is not a by the way the image
was not saved it is an error condition what warrants an modal dialogue
and a user
On 08/03/2009 11:04 PM, gg wrote:
As I said in my original post , this is not a by the way the image
was not saved it is an error condition what warrants an modal dialogue
and a user response.
Please let's not bombard the UI with modal dialogs. They are excellent
for interrupting workflows
On 08/03/2009 05:12 PM, Martin Nordholts wrote:
On 08/03/2009 11:04 PM, gg wrote:
As I said in my original post , this is not a by the way the image
was not saved it is an error condition what warrants an modal dialogue
and a user response.
Please let's not bombard the UI with modal
On 08/03/2009 11:19 PM, Jay Smith wrote:
_I_ would want my workflow interrupted if the program was not going to
do what I had asked it to do. Maybe that's just me.
Hi Jay
When you do a File - Save you want to make sure that your changes is
safely written to disk, right? If you have made no
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Jay Smithj...@jaysmith.com wrote:
On 08/03/2009 03:28 PM, Alexia Death wrote:
Why only 5 seconds? why not until something else happens? IMHO 5 seconds is
not enough.
One of my annoyances with a couple of other programs that I use a lot is
that such types of
Martin Nordholts wrote:
On 08/03/2009 11:19 PM, Jay Smith wrote:
_I_ would want my workflow interrupted if the program was not going to
do what I had asked it to do. Maybe that's just me.
Hi Jay
When you do a File - Save you want to make sure that your changes is
safely written to
gg wrote:
... much erudition elided...
10s may help but IMHO this method of notification is far too unobtrusive.
The STATUS bar should be for relaying status information. Information
that relates to the state of the program. It is used effectively to
prompt awareness of hot key
Sparr wrote:
Maybe I just want to 'touch' the file and saving is the fastest
possible way to do that.
Perhaps I modified or deleted the file on disk, and want to save the
copy that exists in GIMP over whatever is on the disk. I am not sure
if GIMP is already aware of this situation
Valid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=164774
Hi - I was going to look into this enhancement. It was a request to make
it possible for the user to change the zero-point of the image rulers.
However, it looks like the last comment was made about
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Martin Nordholts ense...@gmail.com wrote:
Please let's not bombard the UI with modal dialogs. They are excellent
for interrupting workflows and annoying users. The proper solution is to
make changing the comment dirty the image, it is not to show a modal
While
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 22:06 -0400, Christopher Curtis wrote:
[...]
If you think of how some IM clients notify, this 'elevated status'
message could pop up from the status bar. It would stay open for
10-15 seconds and then disappear back into the status bar.
So I press save, and go for a
26 matches
Mail list logo
