From Alexia:
What you are saying is that we should maintain a fork for you... I
doubt thats going to happen. You can easily maintain your own patch
set yourself however. Its been done before. Not a complete fork but a
patch set distributed separately.
No, certainly not just for me. The fix
From Alexandre:
There are many ways to make yourself useful for the project.
I'm trying to do just that.
Someone, an end user, emailed me off-list, talking about how they'd be upset
with a new rendering, talking of lost files.
Let me offer a cheap and simple solution. Release an incremental
: Zaterdag 31 juli 2010 08:16:59 GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlijn / Bern
/ Rome / Stockholm / Wenen
Onderwerp: Re: [Gimp-developer] Please fix Color and/or Value transfer mode
From Alexandre:
There are many ways to make yourself useful for the project.
I'm trying to do just that.
Someone, an end user
Compile and end-user. Not all en-users compile their version of Gimp.
Bumping the version number in XCF and implementing the compatibility would
probably be better.
Of course. But I had the impression the development cost of such a solution
and
the need to keep XCF unchanged were major
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Charlie De charlieco...@yahoo.com wrote:
Compile and end-user. Not all en-users compile their version of Gimp.
Bumping the version number in XCF and implementing the compatibility would
probably be better.
Of course. But I had the impression the
On Wed, 2010-07-28 at 17:34 -0700, Charlie De wrote:
It's worth noting, however, that XCF is not meant to be an
archival format.
Uh, oh. Of course it is meant to be used that way. If you work on images
using layers, then saving as XCF is the only way you can archive your
work.
As others have
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 01:56 -0700, Charlie De wrote:
So go fix it in gegl. I think it was decided 4 years ago what is going to
happen to the layer mode bugs.
And my point is that wasn't such a good decision precisely because it took 4
years to get it fixed. As stated, an earlier
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Sven Neumann s...@gimp.org wrote:
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 01:56 -0700, Charlie De wrote:
And my point is that wasn't such a good decision precisely because it took 4
years to get it fixed. [...] If my line of thought had been followed 4
years ago,
GEGL
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Christopher Curtis ccurt...@gmail.com wrote:
it is custom coefficients in HSY-space:
Here's a reference to the HSY color model, since it seems uncommon,
and because when searching for gimp hsy in Google the second result
is the email I _just_ sent (!!)
From Alexandre:
If you ask users here and now what they want, you are likely to hear:
In your list of priorities people might come up with, none described broken
essential functionality. Fixing those should be highest priority.
From Tobias:
Wrong. This is open source. That implies that whoever
On 7/30/10, Charlie De wrote:
Wrong. This is open source. That implies that whoever writes the code
decides.
You know it's not that simple. The GIMP is too complex, too high-end a
project for whimsical involvement.
There are many ways to make yourself useful for the project. And by
that I
On Thursday, July 29, 2010 03:34:43 Charlie De wrote:
The broken Color mode was reported 4 years ago! Had the solution been
implemented natively, it would have been available to view, and would
likely have evolved. There's every chance that it could now be ported to
GEGL without the alpha
So go fix it in gegl. I think it was decided 4 years ago what is going to
happen to the layer mode bugs.
And my point is that wasn't such a good decision precisely because it took 4
years to get it fixed. As stated, an earlier native fix would have brought the
benefit to GEGL. It's
On 7/29/10, Charlie De wrote:
Charlie,
I cannot help myself noticing a slight contradiction:
There are three respondents who have so far been arguing against me, three
others haven't. And I'd suggest that the three of you aren't representative
of
the majority of users.
and then you say:
Just in case, not everyone in this list is a GIMP developer. There are
ways and ways to be involved in the project, so there's not much point
counting opinions just because they were expressed. We all have our
own ideas how GIMP could evolve, what bugs should be fixed first and
so on, but
Am Donnerstag, 29. Juli 2010 schrub Charlie De:
Just in case, not everyone in this list is a GIMP developer. There are
ways and ways to be involved in the project, so there's not much point
counting opinions just because they were expressed. We all have our
own ideas how GIMP could
Since we released stable versions with this broken behavior we now have
to maintain backward compatibility to it. It is considered very
important that you can open your old XCF files in a new version of GIMP
and get the same result as in the version you created them in.
I suggest that
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Charlie De charlieco...@yahoo.com wrote:
Since we released stable versions with this broken behavior we now have
to maintain backward compatibility to it. It is considered very
important that you can open your old XCF files in a new version of GIMP
and get
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 23:50 -0700, Charlie De wrote:
I suggest that implementing the improved functionality is of much higher
priority than backwards compatibility with the old.
If xcf got broken a lot of people would abandon gimp - you can't screw
your customers/userbase like that. And it
Would it not be simplest to add a corrected colour mode as a new mode,
keeping the old one? Just call the old one Colour (legacy)? and give the
new one a new internal mode number?
There is no requirement to have back compatability, so trying to open an xcf
file with this new layer mode would
Rob Antonishen wrote:
Would it not be simplest to add a corrected colour mode as a new
mode, keeping the old one? Just call the old one Colour (legacy)?
and give the new one a new internal mode number?
yes it is, same for non-working overlay mode.
There is no requirement to have back
On 7/28/10, David Gowers wrote:
I suggest that implementing the improved functionality is of much higher
priority than backwards compatibility with the old. Particularly in a
project
such as GIMP, where development resources are as precious as they are.
This is an erroneous dichotomy,
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:28 AM, Liam R E Quin l...@holoweb.net wrote:
Having said all that... I'd wondered myself why that photoshop trick of
blurring a layer in mode colour didn't work well in gimp, but I don't
know that this means gimp is wrong here. The right answer is to work
out what
I expect it would be straightforward to implement this without
breaking XCF (e.g. by keeping the existing mode as an option that's
hidden unless you are editing a legacy file), so it seems to be more
an issue of priorities and available resources. Note that
straightforward doesn't translate to
Hello again,
Given that the GEGL solution is not yet perfect, as per the latest relevant bug
report...
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624026
...I wonder if I may help with an algorithm that could be used either in GIMP
internally or in GEGL. I arrived at the solution by trying
On 07/27/2010 07:31 PM, Charlie De wrote:
Hello again,
Given that the GEGL solution is not yet perfect, as per the latest
relevant bug report...
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624026
...I wonder if I may help with an algorithm that could be used either in
GIMP internally or in
Martin,
If you provide a patch that improves Color mode compositing when using
GEGL, I would be happy to review it.
Alas, all I can provide is the algorithm, I'm not a C or C++ coder.
We can't do this change in native GIMP because it would break rendering
of XCF files that relies
On 07/27/2010 08:08 PM, Charlie De wrote:
On the other hand, I understand you have other good reasons to go the GEGL
route. That's fine, except it will take a long time to regain the
functionality
GIMP already has, namely multi-threading. It's for that reason that I think
relatively simple
Second of all, why would it take long to regain multi-threading when
we start using GEGL for real? I expect us to make use of a
multi-threaded GEGL in the first GEGLifixed GIMP release.
Music to my ears!
Good luck with the coding, your efforts are greatly appreciated.
Charlie
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 11:08 -0700, Charlie De wrote:
I thought that it had been decided the existing GIMP Color mode was broken,
so
files relying on old behaviour is not an issue.
Since we released stable versions with this broken behavior we now have
to maintain backward compatibility to
Hello all,
I've joined up with this list to make an important suggestion for improvement.
In short, the Color and Value blending, transfer modes in GIMP do not work as
they should. The problem is compounded by the fact that there seems to be no
application on Linux where these transfer
I believe you're asking for
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325564
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325564which has been addressed
when using GEGL.
Seth
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 6:33 AM, Charlie De charlieco...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello all,
I've joined up with this list to
32 matches
Mail list logo
