On Monday 12 April 2004 12:50 am, Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
Joao S. O. Bueno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So far, all you need seems to resolve if the plug-in
can just remember the last values used.
I will see for that. Meanwhile, feel free to check
On Saturday 10 April 2004 12:05 am, Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
I strongly suggest you change your workflow. If you want
to edit scanned images, then don't use Postscript. If you
need to edit PS, then use a tool that handles Postscript.
GIMP is the wrong tool here.
I can of course import
Hi,
John Culleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now I could of course scan to an pnm or png image instead of
Postscript. (I could still save as Postscript from Gimp.) Which
would be preferable for input to Gimp, pnm or png?
PNG would be very well suited and I really don't understand why you
* Sven Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] [04-12-04 15:32]:
Now I am slowly starting to become angry. Why do you spread such
misinformation? You are on this list for a while now and you should
know that XSane works with GIMP 2.0 after a few trivial
modifications. If the XSane maintainer is really
Hi,
John Culleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, please don't be angry. I raised this issue before, was
referred to the Xsane maintainer, and got a discouraging
reply from him. He had two patches in hand, one short and
one longer, and didn't seem to be in a hurry to implement
either
Hi,
John Culleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
some thngs are improved in 2.0 with respect to the handling
of PostScript files, but some annoyances remain. Since my
major use of Gimp is the refinement of PS images I thought
I might list them.
Refining PS images with GIMP is a very bad idea.
