hi,
this is the part where you get embarrassed about the weird forwarding
and spamming.
i am curious as to what news markus follows and software he uses and
plug-ins that came with the software. what country and the over all
ideas of his teachers and parents.
i just see a different image totall
>
> Because that's apples to bananas. Naked woman are sexually attractive to
> normal people. and babies are not.(*)
This obviously can not be the primary reason why we would not show naked
women. The reason, as I understand it, is that the depicted persons easily
lose their dignity when they ar
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 03:53:18AM +, Markus Triska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> we would not show a naked woman in a Gimp advertisement, even if it is
> perfectly natural. So why would you show a naked baby?
Because that's apples to bananas. Naked woman are sexually attractive to
normal peop
> Do you have problems with posting to the list in general (because there is
> someone or something you cinsider "unsafe") or just because of the rather
> difficult topic?
No, as I outlined in a previous mail, I used "safe" solely to indicate that I
assumed Dave would have no objections to be a
OK, and this is another reply I had meanwhile sent (to Sven, in this case),
and I hope the mailing list agent will know where it fits in - apparently
some parsing of the quoted text is done to make sure that the thread
hierarchy is maintained.
Sorry if this is getting a bit redundant, but I hop
Hello, I noticed this moment that Carol wrote this also to the mailing list.
Please excuse the confusion, but until recently, it was not necessary for me
to be subscribed to the list, so I'm not sure if this mail is attached to the
right thread.
I am copying the reply that I wrote to Carol verb
Again, I am copying the response I sent to Carol a few moments ago verbatim.
--
Dear Carol!
>
> i have looked at the adobe photoshop web site perhaps 4 times. for
> information to help my friend run her photoshop le.
Meanwhile, I have tried too, and it was indeed a bit hard t
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 02:00:28AM +, Markus Triska wrote:
> Apparently, Dave has understood my point and has taken the photo off the web.
> That was in my opinion the only correct behaviour. I think we can agree that
> we would not show a naked woman in a Gimp advertisement, even if it is
>
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> >From: Roman Joost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >Tasks for the first test (all-day-usage; all of the are common tasks for
> >all people, except the one where the indicated group is mentioned):
>
> Could you also make a proper usability test for the recta
Hi,
David Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For my part, some of the things I don't like are the comments
> like "Everybody knows that...", or "that has been planned for
> some time now", or worse "don't waste your time doing that". I
> think that we should try and avoid saying that things are
hi, i was offline for the whole thread. also, i have only read through
half of it. i was delighted when dave neary shared this tutorial with
me and was willing to put it online. so often, there is so much trouble
because people do not see this world to be as wonderful and nice in the
same ways i
Markus Triska wrote:
Anyway - people kind of missed the whole point of me sending that to the
list... this person mailed me off-list because he saw me as someone "safe"
to talk to. That's not a nice way to have things on our mailing list. What
can we do to change that?
As a first step, you could t
Dear Dave!
Sorry if this message appears somewhere outside the original thread - I could
not figure out how to use the list properly, although I really tried this
time.
>
> Anyway - people kind of missed the whole point of me sending that to the
> list... this person mailed me off-list because
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
> Well, it was definitely a bad idea of Dave to forward this stuff to
> the list since the author more or less asked for keeping it private.
That is really badly missing the point, then.
Here are the questions that we need to consider -
1) What makes the mailing lists a
Hi,
"William Skaggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Aargh, what a mess. Okay, to sum up: it's "Edit->Copy Visible", which
> is exactly where it should be, in the Edit menu with Copy. Possibly a
> name like "Copy All Visible" would be better, and possibly it should be
> next to "Copy" instead
Michael Schumacher ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Dave Neary wrote:
> >Anyway - people kind of missed the whole point of me sending that to the
> >list... this person mailed me off-list because he saw me as someone
> >"safe" to talk to. That's not a nice way to have things on our mailing
> >list.
Dave Neary wrote:
I took the screenshot down, and perhaps I should explain why in light of
Simon and Sven's comments... when I read this mail, I got defensive a
bit - the thought that someone thought the photo could be viewed
sexually kind of turned my stomach. So I took it down.
Things like th
Aargh, what a mess. Okay, to sum up: it's "Edit->Copy Visible", which
is exactly where it should be, in the Edit menu with Copy. Possibly a
name like "Copy All Visible" would be better, and possibly it should be
next to "Copy" instead of at the bottom, but still inevitably many people
will tak
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
There is Selection->Copy Visible which essentially does just that.
I would never have found that in a million years. Would it be
possible/desirable to duplicate this function in the Layers menu
(Layers->Copy Visible or wherever) which
Hi,
"Branko Collin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > anyone who draws a relation to the Dutroux tragedy [and baby
> photos] is [...] sick
>
> These kind of remarks may be the reason why somebody like Markus does
> not feel welcome to post here. You are overgeneralizing and jumping
> at conclus
Hi,
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't have a "Copy visible" entry in the Selection menu. Is this in
> 2.0.x or in the HEAD?
Me stupid. Of course it's "Edit->Copy Visible", next to "Edit->Copy".
And IIRC it's there since GIMP-1.0. It's definitely in GIMP-1.2 and
GIMP-2.0.
Sven
__
Hi,
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There is Selection->Copy Visible which essentially does just that.
>
> I would never have found that in a million years. Would it be
> possible/desirable to duplicate this function in the Layers menu
> (Layers->Copy Visible or wherever) which create
Hi,
David Gómez wrote:
I'm not sure where screenshot submissions should go
though - perhaps someone else will pipe up with ideas about that?
I think the actual policy is ok, to put good screenshots, not politically
correct ones.
My point was that I'm not sure what the policy for getting screens
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
There is Selection->Copy Visible which essentially does just that.
I don't have a "Copy visible" entry in the Selection menu. Is this in 2.0.x or
in the HEAD?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Neary
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Gimp-developer mail
Hi ; ),
> >Also, I find the picture of the wet baby in the "Screen Shots" section
> >rather annoying. I mean, it's not the baby's fault, but I think that with
> >all the stuff going on in Europe (Dutroux), placing a half-naked kid with
> >amateur lightning in this section is not a matter of par
Hi,
Sven Neumann wrote:
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I make a copy of each
visible layer and merge them to a new one. I
have beein wondering why this is not an option in the layer context
menu (like "copy visible and merge those").
There is Selection->Copy Visible which essentially does
On 21 Apr 2004, at 15:20, Sven Neumann wrote:
> anyone who draws a relation to the Dutroux tragedy [and baby
photos] is [...] sick
These kind of remarks may be the reason why somebody like Markus does
not feel welcome to post here. You are overgeneralizing and jumping
at conclusions while lack
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-04-21 at 1433.35 +0200):
> > I have beein playing around with Gimp for some time now, and one
> > procedure I apply every once in a while is to make a copy of each
> > visible layer and merge them to a new one (as a means comparable
> > to "CVS tagging" - to mark and save a
On 21 Apr 2004, at 14:33, Dave Neary wrote:
> Markus Triska:
> > Also, I find the picture of the wet baby in the "Screen Shots"
> > section rather annoying. I mean, it's not the baby's fault, but I
> > think that with all the stuff going on in Europe (Dutroux), placing
> > a half-naked kid with am
Hi,
Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have beein playing around with Gimp for some time now, and one
> > procedure I apply every once in a while is to make a copy of each
> > visible layer and merge them to a new one (as a means comparable to
> > "CVS tagging" - to mark and save a stag
Dave Neary ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Markus Triska wrote:
> >Also, I find the picture of the wet baby in the "Screen Shots" section
> >rather annoying. I mean, it's not the baby's fault, but I think that with
> >all the stuff going on in Europe (Dutroux), placing a half-naked kid with
> >amat
Hi Marcus,
I'm forwarding your mail to the developers list for two reasons.
First, it's a major problem that people feel obliged to mail people off-list
because they are "safe" to talk to and this is something that we need to talk
about urgently. For the benefit of the people on the list, this
Hi,
Juhana Sadeharju <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does GIMP compile in unpatched RedHat 9? RedHat 9 is already
> a year old, which is a long time.
Probably not without updating a few libraries. Please read the file
INSTALL. The dependencies are clearly outlined there. www.gimp.org has
a detaile
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi there, perhaps somebody out there may help me on my problems with Gimp
> 2.0.0.
> We installed the earlier Version Gimp 1.2.5 without any problems on our
> School-Network. Than we downloaded the stable Gimp for Windows
> and the GTK 2, uninstalled the earlier Ve
Hi there, perhaps somebody out there may help me on my problems with Gimp
2.0.0.
We installed the earlier Version Gimp 1.2.5 without any problems on our
School-Network. Than we downloaded the stable Gimp for Windows
and the GTK 2, uninstalled the earlier Versions of Gimp and the GTK 1.3
and install
>From: Sven Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Well, something is wrong with _your_ Linux then. But unless you tell
>us about your problems, we won't be able to help you.
Yes, I don't update my Linux weekly. That is the problem.
Does GIMP compile in unpatched RedHat 9? RedHat 9 is already
a year old
Hi,
Juhana Sadeharju <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm puzzled: do you people make perfect initial selections or how
> you scope with the problem? Do you have any problems at all? Why
> not? (I could gather a couple of examples if you think there are no
> problems at all.)
The fact that the sel
>From: Roman Joost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Tasks for the first test (all-day-usage; all of the are common tasks for
>all people, except the one where the indicated group is mentioned):
Hello.
Could you also make a proper usability test for the rectangular
selection? I seem to be forced to use the
38 matches
Mail list logo
