David,
first of all thanks for taking the time to give us input.
There is one phrase here that I am not sure how to interpret:
> I'm not entirely sure how I'd go about designing a website in gimp
> to deal with this problem
The "designing a website in gimp" sounds scary to me because I then
i
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:04:59 +0100, David Marrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As an experiment at work I decided to work on just the one image when "saving
> for web" and found that I really don't need to do the spot comparisons
> between
> images after all. What's more important is the ability t
peter sikking wrote:
> now it is getting late here too. if you can make that description really
> fundamental (like in principle for tens of thousands of web graphic
> designers), and filter your own biases out, then that would be great
> input for us.
>
> but you better be sure it is fundamental
peter sikking wrote:
> interesting to see "Compare compressed images against original", would
> it be enough to see the compressed one and balance that against the size
> and what your customer expects?
As an experiment at work I decided to work on just the one image when "saving
for web" and fou
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Neither is chosing the appropriate format specific "the web" so "save
> for the web" concept is misleading. It should be "select best
> compression format" or so.
I have no argument with this. If we can do away with a separate dialogue
altogether, so much the better.
On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 19:11 +0200, peter sikking wrote:
> Liam,
> Please don't forget other users :-) I routinely have a selection
> that's, say, 10,000 pixels by roughly 40 pixels. This might not
> be a usual case for Web graphics...
>
> an aspect ratio of 1000 to 4. cool.
>
> at what zoom lev
peter sikking wrote:
> interesting to see "Compare compressed images against original", would
> it be enough to see the compressed one and balance that against the size
> and what your customer expects?
I usually do comparisons when I'm trying to get the best image quality out of
jpegs. There seem
Akkana Peck wrote:
> I might have misunderstood this step (I definitely don't follow the
> comment about PS not letting you edit -- maybe that's a PS issue)
> but it sounds like if you did a "Paste as New" in gimp, you wouldn't
> need to create a new canvas or figure out any dimensions.
Oh yeah. T
On 6/26/07, peter sikking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Please don't forget other users :-) I routinely have a selection
> > that's, say, 10,000 pixels by roughly 40 pixels. This might not
> > be a usual case for Web graphics...
>
> an aspect ratio of 1000 to 4. cool.
>
> at what zoom level(s) d
Liam,
>> actually right now I am specifying how the selection tools should
>> deal
>> with long, very narrow selections, with the web guys in mind.
> Please don't forget other users :-) I routinely have a selection
> that's, say, 10,000 pixels by roughly 40 pixels. This might not
> be a usual
On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 01:30 +0200, peter sikking wrote:
> [...]
> actually right now I am specifying how the selection tools should deal
> with long, very narrow selections, with the web guys in mind.
Please don't forget other users :-) I routinely have a selection
that's, say, 10,000 pixels by r
David Marrs writes:
> 4) Open new canvas. PS automatically populates the canvas dimensions with
> those
> of the paste buffer so this operation isn't as cumbersome as it would be in
> Gimp, but really it wouldn't be required at all if PS allowed you to edit an
> image during the next stage.
I
David wrote:
> peter sikking wrote:
>> can you tell me what you mean with "manual work needs to be done"?
>> that can help us with our work.
> Well the most common case is simply selecting a slither of an area
> to be tiled as a background image.
yep, we expect this kind of stuff to be your dai
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 00:52:53 +0200, David Marrs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With a "save *selection* for web" feature, steps 3) and 4) could
> probably be
> omitted altogether for most of the time.
well save for web is a plugin but it probably could be extended to save a
selection. Sounds l
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:02:48 +0200, damianzalewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> gcn> I agree that the tools should aimed towards "top end" users not
> splicing.
> gcn> Gimp's declared aim is to provide tools for creating elements for
> web
> gcn> design not page layout.
>
> Does it really me
gcn> I agree that the tools should aimed towards "top end" users not splicing.
gcn> Gimp's declared aim is to provide tools for creating elements for web
gcn> design not page layout.
Does it really mean I have to use separate program to make few cuts.
And how can I make web page without slicin
peter sikking wrote:
> can you tell me what you mean with "manual work needs to be done"?
> that can help us with our work.
>
Well the most common case is simply selecting a slither of an area to be tiled
as a background image. Sometimes you have to hide a foreground layer before
making the sele
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:08:47 +0200, Øyvind Kolås <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/22/07, Nemes Ioan Sorin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But the correct behavior ( exporting layout for web ) can be seen on
>> Macromedia / Adobe Fireworks. Let say Firefox 8 ( I dont try yet CS
>> version ).
>>
>> T
On 6/22/07, Nemes Ioan Sorin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But the correct behavior ( exporting layout for web ) can be seen on
> Macromedia / Adobe Fireworks. Let say Firefox 8 ( I dont try yet CS
> version ).
>
> They had a proven model that already got the general acceptance. If some
> similar mo
Sorry fo my intrusion here guys
But the correct behavior ( exporting layout for web ) can be seen on
Macromedia / Adobe Fireworks. Let say Firefox 8 ( I dont try yet CS
version ).
They had a proven model that already got the general acceptance. If some
similar model ( to cut in slices - to ren
David,
> peter sikking wrote:
>> We do imagine that a set of website graphics pieces gets _produced_
>> on a single canvas, and when everything works well together
>> graphically, with a single 'cutting mask' all pieces are cut out
>> and saved in the right web format, in a single action.
>
> I do
peter sikking wrote:
>
> We do imagine that a set of website graphics pieces gets _produced_
> on a single canvas, and when everything works well together
> graphically, with a single 'cutting mask' all pieces are cut out
> and saved in the right web format, in a single action.
I don't see how th
Witam peter,
Saturday, May 26, 2007, 11:39:02 AM, napisałe/aś:
ps> Well, let's see:
ps> First we would have to support the task of figuring out the right
ps> page structure and proportions by the designer. This would mean
ps> multicolumn layout, aligning sections vertically. This all of
ps> cou
damianzalewski wrote:
> What gimp is not:
>
> "not a web page mock-up application
> I brought up web mock-ups, but we realised that seriously
> supporting this would mean introducing a ton of functionality;
> it is better done in a specialised application"
>
>I really don't understand what
What gimp is not:
"not a web page mock-up application
I brought up web mock-ups, but we realised that seriously supporting this would
mean introducing a ton of functionality;
it is better done in a specialised application"
I really don't understand what tons of functionality you mean.
The
25 matches
Mail list logo
