[Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp usability tests
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 re-try approach where I start making the rectangular selection from scratch if it goes wrong (and the initial fine-tuning never goes right at first time!). It also seems to be impossible to make precise selections in large images (e.g., 800x800 to 6000x6000). Both large selections and long narrow selections on large images are trouble. If zoom-in is used, even relatively small images becomes large. Test the crop tool too -- it fails for large images as well, or when zoom is used for seeing image details. -*- 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.) In audio editors, the selection can be re-adjusted easily by grabbing and dragging the selection edges. I proposed similar rectangular selection tool for GIMP here a few months ago. It solves all the problems the current rectangular selection tool has (for making one simple rectangular selection). If anyone wants implement the unirectangular selection tool and/or improve the crop tool, please don't hesitate ask my improved designs. (No patent pending.) (GIMP does not anymore compile in my Linux -- we should work out the tools together, if at all.) Regards, Juhana ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp usability tests
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 selection tools need to be improved is well known, thus your rant is completely pointless. In audio editors, the selection can be re-adjusted easily by grabbing and dragging the selection edges. I proposed similar rectangular selection tool for GIMP here a few months ago. This has been proposed years ago and if someone gets around to implement it, the patch will certainly be accepted. (GIMP does not anymore compile in my Linux -- we should work out the tools together, if at all.) Well, something is wrong with _your_ Linux then. But unless you tell us about your problems, we won't be able to help you. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp usability tests
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, which is a long time. Regards, Juhana ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Gimp 2.0 causes error on launching after installation
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 installed than the gtk+-2.2.4-20040124-setup.zip (3620KB) and afterwards the gimp-2.0.0-i586-setup-1.zip On launching the Gimp, the following messages appear and the gimp breaks down: Dos-Window: (gimp-2.0.exe:580): GLib-Critical **: file gconvert.c: line 498 (G_convertion 'str != NULL' failed Error-Message: Die Anweisung in 0x78001d0b verweis auf Speicher in 0x. Der Vorgang read konnte nicht auf dem Speicher durchgeführt werden Has anybody an Idea how to get rid off this problems? We work with windows 2000 Thank you for your help Jonas Witte -- NEU : GMX Internet.FreeDSL Ab sofort DSL-Tarif ohne Grundgebühr: http://www.gmx.net/dsl ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp 2.0 causes error on launching after installation
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 Versions of Gimp and the GTK 1.3 and installed than the gtk+-2.2.4-20040124-setup.zip (3620KB) and afterwards the gimp-2.0.0-i586-setup-1.zip On launching the Gimp, the following messages appear and the gimp breaks down: Dos-Window: (gimp-2.0.exe:580): GLib-Critical **: file gconvert.c: line 498 (G_convertion 'str != NULL' failed See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=132366 Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 is not the first time this has happened. It seems like I get mail from people weekly from people who have valid points to raise, but are intimidated by the list. Second, I have been very occupied recently in real life, and will have very little time to consecrate to the gimp over the coming months, so I'm sure that there are other people better placed to answer your queries. For that reason, I'm leaving your entire mail intact, as well as adding my comments inline. Regards, Dave. Markus Triska wrote: Dear Dave! First, let me explain my greatest thanks and admiration for Gimp 2.0. You all did a great job. I'm writing you because from following the mailing list I got the impression that you are someone that I can contact safely with my issues: 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 stage of development). In fact, I have beein wondering why this is not an option in the layer context menu (like copy visible and merge those) - is there maybe a better way to do this? I use it also when I need a filter to operater on the whole picture (all layers). I don't see a way that this could be nicely implemented in the interface - duplicate all layers doesn't seem like an operation which would be very common or useful for most people, but perhaps a merge visible layers (and keep old layers) option would be useful... As an aside, applying a filter to several layers at once works would be useful, and should (in the first instance) work on linked layers, and later work on layer groups (when we have them). The best way to have this scheduled by someone is to create a bugzilla report for it, and bring it up here on the list for implementation ideas and advice. 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 particularly good taste. Maybe it would be good to show more neutral photographs, like skies and landscapes etc. that are bright and where's much to look at. The baby is my son, I didn't think of any negative connotations, but indeed I wasn't thinking that way. Given your comments and the way you saw it, I will take them down. I'm not sure where screenshot submissions should go though - perhaps someone else will pipe up with ideas about that? Best regards, Markus Triska. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 amateur lightning in this section is not a matter of particularly good taste. Maybe it would be good to show more neutral photographs, like skies and landscapes etc. that are bright and where's much to look at. The baby is my son, I didn't think of any negative connotations, but indeed I wasn't thinking that way. Given your comments and the way you saw it, I will take them down. I'm not sure where screenshot submissions should go though - perhaps someone else will pipe up with ideas about that? I don't think that taking down the screenshot in question is necessary at all. In fact I believe that it would be counterproductive to do so. The Photo in question is a perfectly normal baby photo. It is funny to look at. It doesn't expose any private parts and I actually don't get how one can make a connection to the Dutroux case. I don't think that we should stop showing baby photos, just because some sick people might get weird ideas when looking at these photos. When doing so we also should stop using photos of forests, because people could die in horrible fires in there, we should stop using photos of deserts, because people might get exposed there by terrorists and die a horrible death, and we should not show photos of skies, because skies are the things where planes drop out and crash into buildings. I think that babies are probably one of the most human things out there and we should not stop showing things that basically define humanity, just because there are some people that did horrible things to babies. That having said: If Dave wants to remove the image he of course can and has the right to. But I think it would be utterly wrong to do it just for the reason given by Marcus. Thanks for listening. Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 stage of development). In fact, I have beein wondering why this is not an option in the layer context menu (like copy visible and merge those) - is there maybe a better way to do this? I use it also when I need a filter to operater on the whole picture (all layers). There is Selection-Copy Visible which essentially does just that. 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 particularly good taste. Maybe it would be good to show more neutral photographs, like skies and landscapes etc. that are bright and where's much to look at. The baby is my son, I didn't think of any negative connotations, but indeed I wasn't thinking that way. Given your comments and the way you saw it, I will take them down. I'm not sure where screenshot submissions should go though - perhaps someone else will pipe up with ideas about that? Please don't take the pixture down. It's ridiculous to say that putting such a picture on the internet will cause children to be abused. People who abouse children are sick; not showing them baby pictures won't change that. The picture is in no way offensive and anyone who draws a relation to the Dutroux tragedy is either sick himself or overly cautious. Of course it's your choice what to do since it's the picture of your son. But I don't think there's any reason to take it down. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 amateur lightning in this section is not a matter of particularly good taste. Maybe it would be good to show more neutral photographs, like skies and landscapes etc. that are bright and where's much to look at. The baby is my son, I didn't think of any negative connotations, but indeed I wasn't thinking that way. Given your comments and the way you saw it, I will take them down. I'm not sure where screenshot submissions should go though - perhaps someone else will pipe up with ideas about that? Dave, I agree with your comments re: a friendly, welcoming mailing list. This list should not scare people away from asking valid questions. Instead, it should guide people into asking valid questions in a developer friendly way. Similarly, people should not be scared into omitting perfectly innocent baby photos. Instead, problems like the Dutroux case should be tackled head on, not avoided. People should not be afraid to ask questions or post baby photos, and we as a community (either the GIMP community or the world community) should strive to create an enviroment in which fear becomes a positive katalyst, not an inhibitor. I for one thought it was kind of cute how all GIMP tutorials seemed to revolve around baby photos lately. -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
[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 stage of development). In fact, I have beein wondering why this is not an option in the layer context menu (like copy visible and merge those) - is there maybe a better way to do this? I use it also when I need a filter to operater on the whole picture (all layers). I don't see a way that this could be nicely implemented in the interface - duplicate all layers doesn't seem like an operation which would be very common or useful for most people, but perhaps a merge visible layers (and keep old layers) option would be useful... Be creative: duplicate image, merge all visibible layers, paste back the result and discard the temp image. Use shortcuts and DnD and you get the result fast. It can be scripted too. As an aside, applying a filter to several layers at once works would be useful, and should (in the first instance) work on linked layers, and later work on layer groups (when we have them). The best way to have this scheduled by someone is to create a bugzilla report for it, and bring it up here on the list for implementation ideas and advice. There is a filter all layers already, provided by perl-fu. But filter all layers does not have to output the same than filter the result. GSR ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 lacking the data that would support those conclusions. -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 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 creates a new layer which is a combination of the visible ones? The baby is my son, I didn't think of any negative connotations, but indeed I wasn't thinking that way. Given your comments and the way you saw it, I will take them down. Please don't take the pixture down. It's ridiculous to say that putting such a picture on the internet will cause children to be abused. People who abouse children are sick; not showing them baby pictures won't change that. The picture is in no way offensive and anyone who draws a relation to the Dutroux tragedy is either sick himself or overly cautious. Of course it's your choice what to do since it's the picture of your son. But I don't think there's any reason to take it down. 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. 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? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 particularly good taste. Maybe it would be good to show more neutral photographs, like skies and landscapes etc. that are bright and where's much to look at. I find that observation rather exaggerated. There is no special situation in Europe, at least in the Europe i live in. And a baby picture is just a baby picture, anything else is just on the mind of of those who look at the picture, no matter if it's a professional photograph or a amateur one with you digital camera. Of course the photo is from Dave's son and he can do whatever he thinks is better with it... will take them down. 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. Regards, -- David Gómez The question of whether computers can think is just like the question of whether submarines can swim. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 screenshots on the website(s) is. That is, where to send them, where that's documented and so on. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 creates a new layer which is a combination of the visible ones? Selection-Copy Visible is next to Selection-Copy. That's IMO the perfect place and it does certainly not belong into the Layer menu. You might not have noticed, but there is no Layers menu at all. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 conclusions while lacking the data that would support those conclusions. It's you who is interpreting that into the words I've written. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 creates a new layer which is a combination of the visible ones? Selection-Copy Visible is next to Selection-Copy. That's IMO the perfect place and it does certainly not belong into the Layer menu. You might not have noticed, but there is no Layers menu at all. Still don't see it. I thought the Copy Paste items were in the Edit menu anyway? And my point is that I would never have associated create 1 layer containing the merging of the visible layers to be in the Selection menu. That is clearly (for this usage) something you expect to find in the Layers dock context menu, and perhaps the Layer menu. You still haven't said if this is in 2.0.x or HEAD - if you're talking about HEAD, then I am not able to verify what you're saying. Where was this reorganisation of the menus discussed? Or if it wasn't discussed, where's the document outlining how it will be now? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 take a while to learn about it. Regarding hostility, short of booting people from the list when they say hostile things, the best approach is to refrain from saying hostile things or responding to them. And there is no way, under any circumstances, in any situation, to say negative things about baby pictures without provoking hostile responses. Best, -- Bill __ __ __ __ Sent via the KillerWebMail system at primate.ucdavis.edu ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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. What can we do to change that? Did you ask them why they think you are safe to talk to - and maybe even more interesting, why others don't seem to be safe? Well, talking to a potentially huge audience is always a hurdle, especially when you might feel uncomfortable expressing yourself in a non-native language. And also unfortunately gimp-devel does not have a reputation as a particularily friendly list. People on this list will happily pin you down on your errors as well as brusquely discarding ideas as dumb or non-productive. Ok, I admit that mentioning errors or discussing the pros/cons of an idea is important, but frequently I am bothered by the tone of these responses. Ok, this is a bit of a rant and I am unsure on how to turn this into a productive mail (except repeating known recipes on how to write good mails). So please bear with me :-) Bye, Simon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 of at the bottom, but still inevitably many people will take a while to learn about it. Since Copy Visible is a script, it can't be moved next to Copy. At least not with the current menu system. Mitch is currently replacing it with GtkUIManager. We will see if it offers a better solution. Regarding hostility, short of booting people from the list when they say hostile things, the best approach is to refrain from saying hostile things or responding to them. And there is no way, under any circumstances, in any situation, to say negative things about baby pictures without provoking hostile responses. 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. It would have been better to ask the author of the mail to resend the question to the list himself. It would have been his choice then whether to include this statement or not. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 hostile environment? 2) What can we do to change that? 3) If finger-pointing would help, who are the biggest offenders, and how is their behaviour/language intimidating? 4) What is the minimum standard we expect from people before they are considered worthy to make propositions? I ask this because it is an impression that comes across that certain contributions are dismissed rather too easily. 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 easy or planned until there has been some planning work done or someone has claimed a task. A few years ago I had an awful habit of starting questions where I had an idea what needed to be done with Why don't you just... - it's a habit which annoyed my co-workers who had spent some time thinking about things, and for whom the just wasn't trivial, as well as implicitly belittling them. It would have been better to ask the author of the mail to resend the question to the list himself. That is really missing the point of why I sent the mail to the list. Despite the fact that this is something that we have known about for years, and have discussed at length on several occasions, contributing the the GIMP is in general extremely frustrating, and not particularly rewarding in terms of kudos. It's one of the reasons that I've been making less effort to make the time to contribute for the last month or so. If we do not change that, soon, then this project is a dead duck. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 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 treat private mails as such. For me, this would have been enough. Best regards, Markus Triska. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 treat private mails as such. For me, this would have been enough. Since the mail is public now (I'd assumed that Dave did ask you first), I'd like to ask: 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? Michael -- The GIMP http://www.gimp.org| IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Sodipodi http://sodipodi.sf.net | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/sodipodi ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 do. i dont know if it is the software or that i wasnt taught enough about the harm that can come to people or that i am unable to imagine it until someone clearly explains it to me -- but sometimes i see different things than everyone else does. On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 02:33:35PM +0200, Dave Neary wrote: 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 is not the first time this has happened. It seems like I get mail from people weekly from people who have valid points to raise, but are intimidated by the list. i was intimidated by this list. i was intimidated by the talent and my heros and the very eloquent writing skills and ways of all the different educational and locational backgrounds. i was afraid that i would offend them or make an idiot of myself or well, the list goes on. i wrote anyways and fullfilled most of these fears. i dont blame people for being intimidated. bolsh should have remained intimidated for longer as well (just my opinion). Markus Triska wrote: Dear Dave! First, let me explain my greatest thanks and admiration for Gimp 2.0. You all did a great job. I'm writing you because from following the mailing list I got the impression that you are someone that I can contact safely with my issues: 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 stage of development). In fact, I have beein wondering why this is not an option in the layer context menu (like copy visible and merge those) - is there maybe a better way to do this? I use it also when I need a filter to operater on the whole picture (all layers). this is a three step event for me. as you can read from the other thread, there have been several different ways to do this and it moves around often in the menus. try this: Image --Image --Merge Visible [ok] Image --Edit --Copy Image --Edit --Undo Image --Edit --Paste okay, a few more than three steps, but this has not failed to work since gimp-1.0 and the options have never moved. 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 particularly good taste. Maybe it would be good to show more neutral photographs, like skies and landscapes etc. that are bright and where's much to look at. The baby is my son, I didn't think of any negative connotations, but indeed I wasn't thinking that way. Given your comments and the way you saw it, I will take them down. I'm not sure where screenshot submissions should go though - perhaps someone else will pipe up with ideas about that? what i saw when i saw the photo of this baby was a dork who had a good relationship with a beautiful woman. those are the images i saw and the man i came to know while working on gimp development. now, if i dont google for a scandalous news item that well, i try to fill my time learning about computers and art and history and science and other productive things that i have no time left for these scandals that depress me and cause me to lose touch of the good things that are around me -- if i dont read about the tragedy cited here, i my imagination will run through all the things that i *did not see* when i was delighted to get this photo that was the product of a lovely relationship. and something went wrong, because my intentions were to show poor shy volunteer developers that they might have a nice relationship with a beautiful woman that produces a beautiful child like the one i watched bolsh have. so if dorks having productive relationships with beautiful women is too much for the world -- i dunno what to do. if my honesty about what i saw in this image becomes something that raises the value of that image -- well, this is a screwed up goofy world and i will never get it. sorry if i have been scary or offensive. i have even scared and offended myself this last year. so we can have a mutual scared and offended pity party carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] what's wrong about this list [was: Gimp 2.0]
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 easy or planned until there has been some planning work done or someone has claimed a task. Perhaps we should ask ourselves then why the same questions are asked over and over again. that has been planned for some time now is an answer that shows that the question shouldn't have been asked in the first place. Now, why is it asked then? That's the point we should worry about. If questions that appear as badly researched turn up, this is a clear sign that the information isn't easily available. Now that's something that we can try to change. The fact that mailing-lists are a place for random flame-baits and sometimes harsh words on the other hand is probably not going to change ever. So IMO the things we need to consider are: - how can we make gimp development more transparent? - how can we publish short and long term plans and roadmaps? - why is there no maintained user FAQ? - why is the mailing-list archive not working? Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp usability tests
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 rectangular selection? I seem to be forced to use the re-try approach where I start making the rectangular selection from scratch if it goes wrong (and the initial fine-tuning never goes right at first time!). It also seems to be impossible to make precise selections in large images (e.g., 800x800 to 6000x6000). Both large selections and long narrow selections on large images are trouble. If zoom-in is used, even relatively small images becomes large. This is a good idea for a usablilty test subtask. While the difficulties with the selection tools are well known by the developers, that doesn't change the fact that a usablilty test can show the extent to which it is a problem. (In fact, usablilty tests often start with known or suspected weaknesses.) I for one would be interested in seeing the results, should your suggestion be added to the test. Test the crop tool too -- it fails for large images as well, or when zoom is used for seeing image details. It would be very useful if we can determine which are the biggest impediments to usability here. There are three factors which come to the top of my mind: 1) The extreme brokenness of autoscroll. Autoscrolling tools currently scroll far too quickly to be useful in most cases. 2) Users may not be aware of how to change zoom levels without loosing tool state. Or, in the case of the rectangular select tool, there is no real way to usefully change the zoom, since the entire operation must be performed in a single drag manuver. 3) The interface mechanics (feel) of the tools may need some redesign. For instance, maybe the crop tool should automatically size itself to the bounds of the current selection. Perhaps the rectangular selection tool should work somewhat like how the old bezier select tool did (where you could edit the outline of the selection by clicking at the right points, or cause the selection change to actually occur by clicking in the center.) This would, of course, make selection CSG operations more difficult, so perhaps a third method, where the only selection operations are select the interior of a path, invert, and QuickMask, may actually be more useable, and should be tested as well. I'm puzzled: do you people make perfect initial selections or how you scope with the problem? Generally what I do is make a rough cut in the large and then adjust the selection using the CSG operations. This is pretty unsatisfying sometimes, as you mention, like when you need to move the boarder of a wide selection up a few pixels. Often that requires a lot of adding and subtracting before you get it right. If anyone wants implement the unirectangular selection tool and/or improve the crop tool, please don't hesitate ask my improved designs. (No patent pending.) If you have any suggestions I haven't covered here, I would be interested to hear them. (GIMP does not anymore compile in my Linux -- we should work out the tools together, if at all.) I'm having a difficult time understanding what we should work out the tools together, if at all means, but I assume you meant to say that you wouldn't mind help getting GIMP to compile on your machine, which of course the GIMP developers are more than happy to help with. Unfortunately, due to the fact that there are many things that could potentially be at issue here, and Burrito, the GIMP developers' official psychic, has been a little vague as of late, it would probably help us to know more specifically what problem you are having. The last error messages you got (other than the annoying Make [56872165]: leaving subdir foo/bogus/stuff: Error 1 messages) are most likely to be useful. Rockwalrus ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 perfectly natural. So why would you show a naked baby? I think one should not do this. On a side note, displaying a static photograph does not do justice to the Gimp's functionaliy either. I can use kview for that. Let us both have a look at Adobe's screenshot section of photoshop. I bet they are pretty proud to show off with features and stuff that their PRODUCT is able to provide. i have looked at the adobe photoshop web site perhaps 4 times. for information to help my friend run her photoshop le. we did not ever find the information we were searching for. can you just explain what the differences are and what should matter to us? carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 to get to screenshots. can you just explain what the differences are and what should matter to us? Yeah, they show no naked persons, just as I expected. In contrast, the Gimp site was doing so until recently. Fortunately, this has now changed. Best regards, Markus. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 verbatim - it is a pretty safe bet to assume that if I had written the response to be read by all list members, I would have phrased many things of the initial post differently. This mail hopefully also sheds some light on what I meant with safe. -- Dear Carol! Thank you for your message. i dont blame people for being intimidated. When I said it would be safe to ask Dave, I meant he very probably would not come up with the don't ask me, I'm a developer-argument that one can (rightfully) expect from a developer. I understand very well the difference between developing and FAQ and documentation teams. It is just that the only list I follow is the developer list, and David seemed to belong at least with one leg (if not with two) to the documentation team too, so it seemed natural for me to approach him instead of, say, Sven. I understand also that my issues have nothing to do with Gimp development, and THEREFORE I did not send them to the list myself. okay, a few more than three steps, but this has not failed to work since gimp-1.0 and the options have never moved. Thank you. what i saw when i saw the photo of this baby was a dork who had a good relationship with a beautiful woman. those are the images i saw and the man i came to know while working on gimp development. 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 perfectly natural. So why would you show a naked baby? I think one should not do this. On a side note, displaying a static photograph does not do justice to the Gimp's functionaliy either. I can use kview for that. Let us both have a look at Adobe's screenshot section of photoshop. I bet they are pretty proud to show off with features and stuff that their PRODUCT is able to provide. Best regards, Markus Triska. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 hope I have now made my point clear. Best regards, Markus Triska. --- It's ridiculous to say that putting such a picture on the internet will cause children to be abused For the record, I want to note that I did not say that, as you seem to imply in your reply. The picture is in no way offensive and anyone who draws a relation to the Dutroux tragedy is either sick himself or overly cautious. I think we can agree that most of us rather would not have a screen-shot of an adult woman or man, half-naked like this, in the screen-shots section, albeit professional models who get paid for their job. I do not know why you make a difference for children. If I had not mailed Dave, how long would the photo still be around? Maybe his children will be thankful some day, when they understand what was going on, that not everyone has a photo of them with no clothes on. Given that Dave seems to have understood my point and removed the picture, I consider the issue resolved. I want to thank you again for your efforts. As far as I can tell, you are doing a great job. Best regards, Markus Triska. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 asked about some apparently simple usability issue (where, in contrast, a normal developer could have - rightfully - pointed me to some other place). I deducted this from all the posts in which Dave stated that developers should also answer questions, and that he himself in fact did and had done so. I can only emphasize again that I know very well the difference between a development and a FAQ and documentation team, and I would never have molested Dave with my question were it not for him pointing out that he had no problem with that and in a sense begging for mail. It certainly has nothing to do with the mailing list (this is only how I came to know Dave). If Dave would not exist, or would not post such things to the developer's list, I would have sent the question to some person working on the Wiki, or to the Gimp-User-mailing list, or somewhere else, but never to this place (which I, in fact, have not). It just happens that the developer's list is the only one I follow, and thus it seemed natural for me to contact Dave, and the quickest way to get a useful reply. I did not know that it would turn out this complicated and chaotic. I am sorry that I have caused you so much trouble and confusion. Best regards, Markus Triska. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 people. and babies are not.(*) Hinting that babies are objects of sexual desire is becoming more and more commonplace nowadays, in certain cultures at least (mostly, but not limited to, the us). I do not believe that this is a good direction. In other words, people who equate babies (or children) with sexually desirable objects automatically acknowledge that babies _are_ valid sexual objects. They are not, and harassing others to think that way is not, IMnsHO, a direction we should take. I think this is what Sven wanted to hint at with his comment (that such people were sick). It is not the right thing to do to make yourself a slave of this babies are sexually attractive thinking, which is, as you hopefully agree, not normal. If you don't, then photos of babies are just that, and should evoke feelings of joy, especially for the parents := I voiced my opinion on this mainly to not leave Dave in a kind of limbo, as if he did something wrong. What he did was not wrong at all. (*) pedosexuality is still a mental illness, as defined by most medical associations. (**) (**) homosexuality was a mental illness back in the seventies, and the attempts by doctors to get pedosexuality off the list of mental illnesses have increased a lot recently, so I do not know what the future brings, maybe that proves me wrong -- -==- | ==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e| -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | | ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 2.0
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 are shown naked. That would be a different thing for an artistic, professional picture. For example, I can remember an advertisment of an afro-american, muscular man, naked, holding a white, naked baby. I have no problem with that, and it would make an excellent screen-shot, if not particularly useful to point out Gimp's features (which you should strive to accomplish). Having a poorly lit, amateur photograph showing a naked child that was presumably just having a bath is to my mind a different story. As I stated in a previous mail, If I had not mailed Dave, how long would the photo still have been around? Maybe his children will be thankful some day, when they understand what was going on, that not everyone has a photo of them with no clothes on. We need not delve further into those subjects (although I notice that you raise interesting points), because Dave has decided to take the photo off the web. I think that was a good move, and I'm done with that. Hinting that babies are objects of sexual desire is becoming more and more commonplace nowadays, in certain cultures at least (mostly, but not limited to, the us). I do not believe that this is a good direction. I live outside the US, and the first thing coming to my mind when I saw the photo was the alleged criminal. I had no choice of what I wanted to come to my mind, so it was this, of which all newspapers here tell these days. I think that it is unreasonable to assume I am the only person who reacted this way. If I had known that Dave would forward my mail to the list, I would have thought of other reasons that people outside Europe could easily follow. Apparently, Dave could. I think this is what Sven wanted to hint at with his comment (that such people were sick). It is not the right thing to do to make yourself a slave of this babies are sexually attractive thinking, which is, as you hopefully agree, not normal. If you don't, then photos of babies are just that, and should evoke feelings of joy, especially for the parents := Yes, absolutely. And on a side note, I wish Dave the best for his son and everything, and hope he makes many pictures of him to keep, and to show him later. But he does not have to place those in the Gimp screen shots section, that's it. I voiced my opinion on this mainly to not leave Dave in a kind of limbo, as if he did something wrong. What he did was not wrong at all. Again, I have to point out that I never intended to send the mail that Dave quoted to the list - I only thought that he would understand the issues I raised, and right I was. Best regards, Markus Triska. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
