[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is definately not a bug.
[..]
Gimp does all these things correctly. It is aimed at a competant user
base, it does not try to be a beginner's guide using different formats.
It is true that GIMP provides correct functionality for export/save.
The corresponding
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looking from outside, i've gotten the impression that the GIMP project has
been
beaten by similar issues before. I feel like too many GUI changes got
discussed
to death, because no one managed to come up with solutions which fit all
user groups (let alone the
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 23:56 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quite paradoxically, splitting UI development into GIMP-Pro and
GIMP-Standard could be beneficial for the GIMP as a project.
I don't think so. Such a split would make coding a lot more difficult
and less fun. Since our product
Hi,
thank you all for taking the time to consider and being patient with me.
It seems what's lacking most is the virtue of patience on my side...
I understand now that multiple UIs are too expensive. (As a sidenote, the
forking
idea doesn't imply to anticipate the UI team's work. More
Hi,
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 18:21 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue of Export/Save/data-loss-protection is in my regard more of a bug
which
should be fixed as soon as possible than part of UI redesign. As with any fix
this
might be superseded by a more general solution later on.
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 18:21 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue of Export/Save/data-loss-protection is in my regard more of a
bug which
should be fixed as soon as possible than part of UI redesign. As with
any fix this
might be superseded by a more general solution later on.
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 02:09 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, i'm thinking of the case where you saved those 25 steps to a jpeg and the
next day,
sitting in the plane to your customer, you discover that this curve should be
tweaked a litte bit more.
That is exactly why JPEG should
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 08:36:39 +0200, Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 02:09 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, i'm thinking of the case where you saved those 25 steps to a jpeg
and the next day,
sitting in the plane to your customer, you discover that this
Hi all,
Sven Neumann wrote:
[..] JPEG should not be offered as a save format. Saving
to a JPEG file is clearly an export.
this is totally true.
The problem is that this violates widely accepted UI standards.
Usability shows it's ugly side here by demanding conformance to
users' expectations
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dreaming of Adam's Pupus Pipeline[3] for nearly a decade now, i doubt
the upcoming GEGL goodness will fill in that role anytime soon.
GEGL is basically Pupus, it doesn't do network transparent buffers
yet, but it has an infrastructure
Hi,
Alchemie foto\grafiche wrote:
gib_mir_mehl wrote:
Don't all those export troubles disintegrate once we presume a little
more confidence in the undo function?
More confidence will require a option to save undo history.
As it is now once the image is closed its Undo History
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 01:35:27 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What would a user interface look like for exporting undo history and
for merging the history with the image again?
Are there already proposals for this?
Just my take... is this not something that GEGL and the non-destructive
Jon Senior wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What would a user interface look like for exporting undo history and
for merging the history with the image again?
Are there already proposals for this?
Just my take... is this not something that GEGL and the non-destructive
editing will take
gib_mir_mehl wrote:
Don't all those export troubles disintegrate once we presume a little
more confidence in the undo function?
More confidence will require a option to save undo history.
As it is now once the image is closed its Undo History vanish,forever lost ,
so can't be used to correct
14 matches
Mail list logo
