Hi,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine
alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:05 AM, Jehan Pagès wrote:
Hi,
I just wanted to know if there was some help needed for the GEGL
transition.
We absolutely need help there :)
From what I
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
We have discussed it in the future and decided against it.
Sorry, as a newbie to time traveling I easily get confused.
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
On 16 November 2012 11:54, Alexandre Prokoudine
alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alberto Mardegan wrote:
I'm not here to reignite the discussion about the new save/export
behaviour, don't worry. :-)
and
So, given the inconcialiability of the
Alberto Mardegan (ma...@users.sourceforge.net) wrote:
On 11/16/2012 12:54 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alberto Mardegan wrote:
I'm not here to reignite the discussion about the new save/export
behaviour, don't worry. :-)
and
So, given the
Hello everyone,
First of all, I want to thank all developers for making this great program
GIMP.
And I have some improvement suggestions about GIMP.
(you don't have to respond them, and I am not searching support either)
*
*
1)* a more simple and clear GIMP website:* I think GIMP download
Am 16.11.2012 00:24, schrieb Liam R E Quin:
On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 21:30 +0100, yahvuu wrote:
how much support for 'web type' blending modes does GIMP really need?
This Web thing will never take off, it's just a momentary... er...
wait :)
Or: The Internet? Is that thing still around? :)
Am 15.11.2012 23:28, schrieb gespert...@gmail.com:
But after reading further and, if I got it right, I found that there
is a property in the specs that allows to choose the space for
blending, and the newer blending and filter specs default to linear.
The old ones, however, default to sRGB
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 01:54:10PM +0200, Alberto Mardegan wrote:
No, they aren't: I'm not proposing to remove or change the current
behaviour. I'm proposing to add a configuration option (I don't care how
hard it is to find) to re-enable the old behaviour.
I also find the change frustrating
Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
I also find the change frustrating for my workflow. I don't mind learning
the export-instead-of-save command, but it's bad UI to always confirm on
exit even after a file is saved -- and, for many actual real world user
workflows, exported *is* saved
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:11:45PM +0100, Simon Budig wrote:
I also find the change frustrating for my workflow. I don't mind learning
the export-instead-of-save command, but it's bad UI to always confirm on
exit even after a file is saved -- and, for many actual real world user
workflows,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Right, and that's fine. Put the option in safe by default. But right now,
you're punishing everyone else. Forcing that workflow choice on everyone
doesn't lead to a good user experience.
Forcing would imply malice.
I find it... almost
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Alberto Mardegan wrote:
images in XCF files. Whether this category is big or small, I don't know
for sure, but it's pretty reasonable to think that it's large enough to
deserve a configuration option.
Where would you stop with configuration options, when
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 05:48:45PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
Right, and that's fine. Put the option in safe by default. But right now,
you're punishing everyone else. Forcing that workflow choice on everyone
doesn't lead to a good user experience.
Forcing would imply malice.
No,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 05:53:22PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
images in XCF files. Whether this category is big or small, I don't know
for sure, but it's pretty reasonable to think that it's large enough to
deserve a configuration option.
Where would you stop with configuration
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
With some sensible discretion. Here, it's not just a paint it pink please!
no, it must be purple! discussion. There's two valid use cases -- people
who work in very different ways. It'd be easy to support both.
Would it?
adding a
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:09:00PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
With some sensible discretion. Here, it's not just a paint it pink please!
no, it must be purple! discussion. There's two valid use cases -- people
who work in very different ways. It'd be easy to support both.
Would it?
Maybe it could be solved with a nice system I think could be fine:
Adding a simple configuration option: Do not ask me about saving when
close files that has not been saved XCF format
In spanish: No preguntarme si deseo guardar al cerrar imágenes que no he
guardado antes en formato XCF.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org wrote:
Simon asked for a usability study. This is no formal study, but there's
plenty of direct feedback from actual users.
And there is also plenty of people that have showed up with saved
files they want to change but cant,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:13:04PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
1. Convert from RAW in other software. Save my originals there.
2. Select a dozen or so image for touchup work. Make jpg copies.
(Occasionally, TIFF.)
3. Open all of those copies in gimp, make my adjustments
Oh, let me throw up this idea for you - you do not need a fork, just
a script to override the default close... Very easy to install,
maintain and distribute. No fork needed.
___
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:16:01PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
Uh. Yes.
And this statement is based on what experience exactly? :)
I've been involved in free software and maintaining software projects for
many years, so I know that adding code to handle options adds maintenance.
But,
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:20:13PM +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
Oh, let me throw up this idea for you - you do not need a fork, just
a script to override the default close... Very easy to install,
maintain and distribute. No fork needed.
Okay, awesome. I had no idea that was possible. Can you
On 11/16/2012 04:20 PM, Alexia Death wrote:
Oh, let me throw up this idea for you - you do not need a fork, just
a script to override the default close... Very easy to install,
maintain and distribute. No fork needed.
But is the old behaviour something that can be achieved by a script?
I
Von: Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com
Beyond that it's in the hands of community if they want the old
scenario back and maintain some sort of a fork.
The performance of https://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp is somewhat
underwhelming, so far.
IMO we should revert back to
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:30:46PM +0100, Michael Schumacher wrote:
Beyond that it's in the hands of community if they want the old
scenario back and maintain some sort of a fork.
The performance of https://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp is somewhat
underwhelming, so far.
It doesn't appear to
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:13:04 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
changes to the way things have been done before. But it'd also be nice if
broader workflows could be taken into account. Here's mine:
1. Convert from RAW in other software.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:37:38PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
Exporting/Overwriting + configurable shortcuts.
http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entry/gimp-2.8-understanding-ui-changes
Right, that I'm familiar with.
And there is Akkana's script:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org wrote:
Change is good. But listen to feedback as you make it. When there's a clear
use case, see if you can cover it without serious detriment to the rest.
I just have to make this point... All feedback recived in this manner
is
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:40:54PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
That explains why config options have a cost, not why they are bad. I think
that's well understood. All features have costs.
But you want _us_ to pay that cost :)
I guess. That's why I'm asking nicely. :)
Some options
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 04:43:32PM +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
Change is good. But listen to feedback as you make it. When there's a clear
use case, see if you can cover it without serious detriment to the rest.
I just have to make this point... All feedback recived in this manner
is biased.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Some options have high cost and only benefit an obscure case. In *this*
case, the cost is relatively small (one option which is a refinement of an
option that's always been there) and the *reward for the project* is high.
The problem here
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
Sure. You can't use it as a survey. But you can use it to judge engagement.
Users who care enough to come and complain are not just unhappy haters --
they're users who care a lot. In the case of creating a bugzilla account or
signing up
On 11/16/2012 04:11 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:09:00PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
With some sensible discretion. Here, it's not just a paint it pink please!
no, it must be purple! discussion. There's two valid use cases -- people
who work in very different
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 06:50:33PM +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
The problem here is that you are thinking in terms of one little
switch can't do no harm. You are not considering all the planned work
to make GIMP a truly non-destructive editor, all the corner cases like
native CMYK
On 11/16/2012 04:40 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
That explains why config options have a cost, not why they are bad. I think
that's well understood. All features have costs.
But you want _us_ to pay that cost :)
No, I offered to
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 05:07:41PM +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
This is analogous to saying don't use emacs just to do a quick edit;
use vi for that. Different tools have different interfaces, and I
don't want to learn two different interfaces to edit images just because
I want to quick and
--- En date de : Ven 16.11.12, Ali Carikcioglu ali.ca...@gmail.com a écrit :
Hello everyone,
First of all, I want to thank all developers for making this great program
GIMP.
And I have some improvement suggestions about GIMP.
...
6) Combine Save As and Export buttons: Click Save As and, save
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Karl Günter Wünsch
k...@mineralien-verkauf.de wrote:
If I am editing an image to my liking I usually need several sizes and
sometimes even aspect crops. Since sharpening is the last step in almost
all of my workflows I end up creating a master (saved as XCF)
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Karl Günter Wünsch wrote:
Oh hey! Some good old-fashioned overreacting right here :)
No, just my honest opinion on what has happened.
Yes, you are honestly overreacting.
Alexia is one of GIMP developers. You've been using results of her
work since 2.6 that
Alexia,
I'm really sorry. I counted about 50 new messages about that very topic after I
posted my message to the list. I'm sorry for the noise, really.
What I notice however is that very matter brings much debate. So I looks to me
that the chapter is far from closed and far from bringing
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
XCF is always the internal state of the document. Images get imported
into an internal XCF, not opened and manipulated directly.
Yes, I know. But the *option* isn't fundamental.
When you're driving a car, it's not a fundamental
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:20:47 +0200, Alexia Death wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Matthew Miller mat...@mattdm.org wrote:
To run with this analogy: the problem is when you *frequently* need
something that is more than nano provides. In the specific case of Gimp, I
don't think there's
On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 10:14 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
In the specific case of Gimp, I
don't think there's anything else that offers layers, curves, and a healing
brush.
If you are making use of layers, you're into GIMP territory, and into
the territory where saving as JPEG and losing the
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:33:45 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
XCF is always the internal state of the document. Images get imported
into an internal XCF, not opened and manipulated directly.
Yes, I know. But the *option* isn't
On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 14:05 +0200, Ali Carikcioglu wrote:
Hello everyone,
First of all, I want to thank all developers for making this great program
GIMP.
And I have some improvement suggestions about GIMP.
(you don't have to respond them, and I am not searching support either)
*
*
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Alberto Mardegan wrote:
Just please don't tell people that their needs are wrong only because
you don't feel the same needs.
We never said that.
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 12:04 -0500, Robert Krawitz wrote:
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:40:41 -0500, Liam R E Quin wrote:
If you are making use of layers, you're into GIMP territory, and into
the territory where saving as JPEG and losing the layers can be a
problem.
Emphasis on *can be*. But
Hi!
This huge discussion here is about a single dialog that warns you that
you might lose work, which is dismissed easily.
Probably nothing in the world is more annoying than stupid pop-ups are
you sure? without even an option to turn them off.
I believe that:
- in the case user loaded flat
So unless you come up with a real usability study within our target user
group that shows that they can't handle this change we won't change
this.
Or, you can do what I've done-- build Gimp 2.6 and not take upgrades.
Monty
___
gimp-developer-list
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:55:01PM -0300, gespert...@gmail.com wrote:
- adding a default shortcut for Overwrite (I use CTRL+SHIFT+E for that)
- Mark the save flag after the overwrite, so GIMP doesn't ask for saving.
Yeah, I guess that latter would handle pretty much all I want. I'm already
Hi all,
A couple different lines of discussion are in this thread, the correct
way to implement Overlay in regular sRGB, the effect of linear gamma
blending with respect to changing w3 standards, how to deal with
legacy blend modes after the switch to linear light image editing.
An implicit
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:50:33 +0400
From: alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com
To: gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Save/export, option to go back to old behaviour
This has been discussed a dozen of times. One of these days I'll
really finish the new FAQ so that we
Hi!
Now, that's exactly a Communist way.
Птн 16 Ноя 2012 20:28:45 от Michael Natterer mi...@gimp.org:
You can all stop wasting your time arguing.
We did this change for a reason, and we will not revert
it nor will we make the behavior configurable.
I have not read any of the mails on
It's a pragmatic response.
The development team size (I'm not among them) is such that they need to do
their own thing. They've done a lot of work to reach this decision and
think that as their vision is realized it will become recognized as clearly
the correct move.
As I see it, you've all got
Egor, if you spend a little time reading gimp mailing archives, you will
see that topic was discussed to death so many times with the same treads
of dozens mails, that starting it again can be considered impolite
towards developers. The time they spend answering the same question for
* Egor Voznessenski vozn...@mail.ru [11-16-12 14:55]:
Hi!
Now, that's exactly a Communist way.
Птн 16 Ноя 2012 20:28:45 от Michael Natterer mi...@gimp.org:
You can all stop wasting your time arguing.
...
Well Egor, you didn't even that that correct. It is not communistic, its
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Monty Montgomery xiphm...@gmail.com wrote:
So unless you come up with a real usability study within our target user
group that shows that they can't handle this change we won't change
this.
Or, you can do what I've done-- build Gimp 2.6 and not take upgrades.
On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 19:54 -0300, gespert...@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of hours ago, when discussing this issue with Jesusda we both
noticed (both noticed it for the very first time) the option in the
preferences that disables the warning for unsaved XCF files.
That option has been removed
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:36:30 -0500, Liam R E Quin wrote:
On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 12:04 -0500, Robert Krawitz wrote:
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:40:41 -0500, Liam R E Quin wrote:
If you are making use of layers, you're into GIMP territory, and into
the territory where saving as JPEG and losing the
59 matches
Mail list logo
