Op 07-08-13 21:24, Alexandre Prokoudine schreef:
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Yottskry wrote:
The sheer arrogance of the developers is astonishing. Essentially the attitude
is that if you don't like the mindless changes they've made then you're simply
not part of the target audience. Apparen
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Yottskry wrote:
> The sheer arrogance of the developers is astonishing. Essentially the attitude
> is that if you don't like the mindless changes they've made then you're simply
> not part of the target audience. Apparently GIMP is aimed at professionals.
> Fine, bu
I understand exactly how you feel. I hated the export feature too for like a
month or so until it just became second nature for me to use it. It shouldn't
take you that long to get used to it. However, if it bothers you that much,
there's a plugin you can install that'll add a new option "Save/E
On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 18:44 +0200, Sam_ wrote:
> a great improvement : 1 button for everything.
I'm guessing that a window with only one button marked Save, and no
open, paste, open as layers, cut, copy, filters or other features would
not in fact satisfy you, Sam_.
In fact no recent version of
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 22:45 +0200, Dominik Tabisz wrote:
> This is the only real issue with GIMP - dependencies and "dance" with
> *-dev packages.
That's true for building a lot of stuff. With a recent system you only
need babl and gegl, and to use a non-system prefix for installing
everything.
> If you know how to run this kind of commands, surely you know that you
> need *-dev packages installed to build anything? :)
This is the only real issue with GIMP - dependencies and "dance" with
*-dev packages.
I use mostly 2.6 instead of 2.8 because of this. And i swear a lot
because 2.6 lack:
Sure would
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 31, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Tom Williams wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 11:33 AM, David Joyner wrote:
>> Or maybe a new email list could be opened up
>> specifically for people confused by the export vs save issue?
>>
>>
>
> I second this. :)
>
> Peace...
>
> Tom
>
I sure would like this :D
(stupid iPod)
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 31, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Tom Williams wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 11:33 AM, David Joyner wrote:
>> Or maybe a new email list could be opened up
>> specifically for people confused by the export vs save issue?
>>
>>
>
> I second this.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Paul Cartwright wrote:
> checking for BABL... no
> configure: error: Package requirements (babl >= 0.1.11) were not met:
>
> Requested 'babl >= 0.1.11' but version of babl is 0.1.10
>
> # dpkg -l|grep babii
If you know how to run this kind of commands, surely you
On 07/31/2013 11:33 AM, David Joyner wrote:
> Or maybe a new email list could be opened up
> specifically for people confused by the export vs save issue?
>
>
I second this. :)
Peace...
Tom
--
/When we dance, you have a way with me,
Stay with me... Sway with me.../
___
IMHO this forum is for user questions, not for compiling questions
and the developer list is a better place for such questions.
Or maybe a new email list could be opened up
specifically for people confused by the export vs save issue?
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Paul Cartwright wrote:
> On
On 07/31/2013 12:58 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> http://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp
>
> The fork is in your hands.
>
> Alexandre Prokoudine
> http://libregraphicsworld.org
well, the good news is I was able to download it. the bad news is, it
won't install.. this is the part where linux isn't
Paul Cartwright wrote:
awesome, I tried apt-get install noxcf-gimp and it didn't find it.. is
this package real??
It's a Github repository. You can clone it with Git or download the
sources ZIP file (see the right border on that site) and build
this GIMP fork from the sources.
Kind regards,
On 07/31/2013 12:58 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> http://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp
>
> The fork is in your hands.
awesome, I tried apt-get install noxcf-gimp and it didn't find it.. is
this package real??
--
Paul Cartwright
___
gimp-user-list ma
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:51 PM, asbesto wrote:
> I really hope for a fork of the entire Gimp project someday.
http://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp
The fork is in your hands.
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing
On 07/21/2013 02:43 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
On 07/20/13 19:07, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Joseph A. Nagy, Jr [07-20-13 19:50]:
On 07/20/13 18:03, Jernej Simončič wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:20:56 -0500, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
Windows isn't secure or stable enough.
Wow, people ar
On 07/20/13 19:07, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Joseph A. Nagy, Jr [07-20-13 19:50]:
On 07/20/13 18:03, Jernej Simončič wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:20:56 -0500, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
Windows isn't secure or stable enough.
Wow, people are still living in the 90's.
I am also
unahppy at
* Joseph A. Nagy, Jr [07-20-13 19:50]:
> On 07/20/13 18:03, Jernej Simončič wrote:
> >On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:20:56 -0500, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> >
> >>Windows isn't secure or stable enough.
> >
> >Wow, people are still living in the 90's.
> >
> >>I am also
> >>unahppy at how unfree FOSS is, f
On 07/20/13 18:03, Jernej Simončič wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:20:56 -0500, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
Windows isn't secure or stable enough.
Wow, people are still living in the 90's.
I am also
unahppy at how unfree FOSS is, fettered with crap licenses like the GPL.
Sounds like you don't
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:20:56 -0500, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> Windows isn't secure or stable enough.
Wow, people are still living in the 90's.
> I am also
> unahppy at how unfree FOSS is, fettered with crap licenses like the GPL.
Sounds like you don't know what FOSS authors mean by Free.
-
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:57:07 -0400
> From: ren...@olgiati-in-paraguay.org
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:03:45 +0100
> Andrew & Bridget wrote:
>
>
> > Complet
I suppose you're right. How silly of me!
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 20, 2013, at 10:50 AM, John Meyer wrote:
> What, and spend our time doing actual work? ;-)
>
>
>
> Kasim Ahmic wrote:
>> You know, we probably could've saved so much hate and fighting had that link
>> been shared earlier lol
What, and spend our time doing actual work? ;-)
Kasim Ahmic wrote:
You know, we probably could've saved so much hate and fighting had that link
been shared earlier lol
Oh well. This "debate" was somewhat funny to read :P
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 20, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Bob Long wrote:
Ka
Kasim Ahmic wrote,
> On Jul 20, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Bob Long wrote:
[..]
>> Or,
>>
>> 3. use this plugin which implements the old way within GIMP:
>> http://www.shallowsky.com/software/gimp-save/
> You know, we probably could've saved so much hate and fighting had
that link been shared earlie
You know, we probably could've saved so much hate and fighting had that link
been shared earlier lol
Oh well. This "debate" was somewhat funny to read :P
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 20, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Bob Long wrote:
> Kasim Ahmic wrote,
>
>> Considering that they put a lot of time and effo
* Jeffery Small [07-20-13 00:48]:
> Alexandre Prokoudine writes:
>
> >On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Renaud OLGIATI wrote:
>
> >> Pity the recent changes have made it so much less pleasant to
> >> use; every time I have saved my work back to its original .jpg
> >> and the stupid prog claims
Alexandre Prokoudine writes:
>On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Renaud OLGIATI wrote:
>> Pity the recent changes have made it so much less pleasant to
>> use; every time I have saved my work back to its original .jpg
>> and the stupid prog claims I have not saved it, I heartily curse
>> those r
Kasim Ahmic wrote,
> Considering that they put a lot of time and effort into GIMP 2.8 and that
> this issue has been being brought up for over a year now, I don't think they
> "quickly rejected" the idea of a toggle.
>
> There are only two things you can do at this point;
> 1. Stop using GIMP
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
>>> Everyone works differently. The old way of save/save as worked just fine.
>>> There was NOTHING wrong with it.
>>
>>
>> There was nothing wrong with it _for you_. You cannot forbid other
>> opinions on the matter to exist.
>
> That is
On 07/19/13 22:25, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
Everyone works differently. The old way of save/save as worked just fine.
There was NOTHING wrong with it.
There was nothing wrong with it _for you_. You cannot forbid other
opinions on
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
>>> It's not your job to teach us anything.
>>
>> Oh it is :) No matter how much you personally resist. You might as
>> well tell us to stop producing the user manual -- after all, if we are
>> not allowed to teach you, then let's be consi
On 07/19/13 21:39, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
Considering that they put a lot of time and effort into GIMP 2.8 and
that this issue has been being brought up for over a year now, I
don't think they "quickly rejected" the idea of a toggle.
There are only two things you can do at this point; 1. Stop using
Considering that they put a lot of time and effort into GIMP 2.8 and that this
issue has been being brought up for over a year now, I don't think they
"quickly rejected" the idea of a toggle.
There are only two things you can do at this point;
1. Stop using GIMP
2. Get used to the new workflow
On 07/19/13 20:19, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
In my experience any attempt to teach users good practices will be met
by a few snobbery accusations. Today it's you who issues them.
Tomorrow it will be someone else.
It's not your job t
On 07/19/2013 06:03 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
It's not your job to teach us anything.
Very true. However, it is also not a developer's job to respond to every whim of
every user. This is simply not possible.
When a specificworkflow structure proves unwieldy for reasons not necessarily
und
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 5:03 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
>> In my experience any attempt to teach users good practices will be met
>> by a few snobbery accusations. Today it's you who issues them.
>> Tomorrow it will be someone else.
>
> It's not your job to teach us anything.
Oh it is :) No ma
On 07/19/13 19:13, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
No, this is not an improvement. More developer snobbery, thinking they know
more than the average user.
Actually, it's the job of developers to know a lot about things like
workflows, dig
Hi,
It may be just me b ut I honestly cannot see what all the fuss is about. Things
used to work one way now they work another - a few minutes for muscle memory
and the new way is instinct without thought so what is the problem. For years
we put needles in grooves on flat vinyl, now we just cli
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> No, this is not an improvement. More developer snobbery, thinking they know
> more than the average user.
Actually, it's the job of developers to know a lot about things like
workflows, digital imaging and suchlike. It just so happens t
* Alexandre Prokoudine [07-19-13 20:02]:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:43 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
>
> >> No, this is not an improvement. More developer snobbery, thinking they
> >> know more than the average user. Disgusting. Unfortunately GIMP is
> >> still the best tool for working with ima
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:43 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
>> No, this is not an improvement. More developer snobbery, thinking they
>> know more than the average user. Disgusting. Unfortunately GIMP is
>> still the best tool for working with images, despite the developers
>> attempts otherwise.
>
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Dominik Tabisz wrote:
> Why photography skill? Why not draw rest of legs, hands, heads (or
> whatever is photo-amputated).
Are you suggesting to actually add new features?
*shivers* What a horrible, disgusting idea! :)
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicswo
2013/7/19, Alexandre Prokoudine :
>
> In fact, I think for just that reason we should remove something else
> in 2.10. For example, I always thought that people need to "crop"
> pictures properly whil taking them (that is, "crop with legs"). So
> maybe we could just remove the cropping tool and te
By saying "despite the developers attempts otherwise", are you implying that
the devs are actually trying to make GIMP worse? I know that this may sound
beyond insane to a person such as yourself, but I don't think that's the case
here.
And if you're so dissatisfied with "the best tool for work
* Joseph A. Nagy, Jr [07-19-13 18:39]:
[...]
> No, this is not an improvement. More developer snobbery, thinking they
> know more than the average user. Disgusting. Unfortunately GIMP is
> still the best tool for working with images, despite the developers
> attempts otherwise.
You have chosen
On 07/19/13 17:17, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
On 07/19/13 17:10, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
I could ask you the same thing. Yes, if you SAVE the image, you'll
have all the layers intact. However, if you EXPORT the image, all the
layers are me
On 07/19/2013 03:12 PM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> On 07/19/13 17:10, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
>> I could ask you the same thing. Yes, if you SAVE the image, you'll
>> have all the layers intact. However, if you EXPORT the image, all the
>> layers are merged.
>
>
> That is a new and unexpected behavior
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Kokopalen wrote:
> That would be ok, but, personally, what I'm tired of is the undo tool...
Why?
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.o
El 19/07/2013 23:54, "Alexandre Prokoudine"
wrote:
> In fact, I think for just that reason we should remove something else
> in 2.10. For example, I always thought that people need to "crop"
> pictures properly whil taking them (that is, "crop with legs"). So
> maybe we could just remove the cropp
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> On 07/19/13 17:10, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
>>
>> I could ask you the same thing. Yes, if you SAVE the image, you'll
>> have all the layers intact. However, if you EXPORT the image, all the
>> layers are merged.
>
>
>
> That is a new and unexp
On 07/19/13 17:10, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
I could ask you the same thing. Yes, if you SAVE the image, you'll
have all the layers intact. However, if you EXPORT the image, all the
layers are merged.
That is a new and unexpected behavior. I used to save png with layers
intact. Now the merge isn't e
I could ask you the same thing. Yes, if you SAVE the image, you'll have all the
layers intact. However, if you EXPORT the image, all the layers are merged.
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 19, 2013, at 5:57 PM, "Joseph A. Nagy, Jr" wrote:
> On 07/19/13 16:48, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
>> That's just it, you
On 07/19/13 16:10, scl wrote:
On 19.07.13 at 9:21 PM Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI:
Completely useless for the vast majority who only want to quickly open
a camera-produced .jpeg, rotate, crop and rescale it, and never work
on it again.
So, then GIMP is perhaps not the right choice for your workflow.
I
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> On 07/19/13 16:48, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
>>
>> That's just it, you don't.
>
>
>
> What are you talking about? Even with the new behavior, if the png is saved
> with layers intact, you just open/import it and look at the layers and paths
> t
On 07/19/13 16:48, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
That's just it, you don't.
What are you talking about? Even with the new behavior, if the png is
saved with layers intact, you just open/import it and look at the layers
and paths tool to see what layers exist.
--
Yours in Christ,
Joseph A Nagy Jr
"Wh
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Kasim Ahmic wrote:
> Anyway, is there like a way to block these sort of messages?
> The "export vs save" ones I mean.
You could setup filters to move to the trash bin everything that comes
from this mailing list and contains the words "save" and "export".
Or you
That's just it, you don't.
Anyway, is there like a way to block these sort of messages? The "export vs
save" ones I mean.
Sent from my iPod
On Jul 19, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Andrew & Bridget
wrote:
> On 19/07/2013 21:11, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Joseph A. N
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Renaud OLGIATI wrote:
> Pity the recent changes have made it so much less pleasant to
> use; every time I have saved my work back to its original .jpg
> and the stupid prog claims I have not saved it, I heartily curse
> those responsible, and wish them to suffer
Because I have been using it (mainly to quickly open a camera-produced .jpeg,
rotate, crop and rescale it, and never work on it again) for over 15 years.
Because it is the only serious image manipulation prog for Linux.
Pity the recent changes have made it so much less pleasant to use; every ti
On 19.07.13 at 9:21 PM Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI:
Completely useless for the vast majority who only want to quickly open a
camera-produced .jpeg, rotate, crop and rescale it, and never work on it again.
So, then GIMP is perhaps not the right choice for your workflow.
It's like buying a big road cru
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:03:45 +0100
Andrew & Bridget wrote:
> > Completely useless for the vast majority who only want to quickly open a
> > camera-produced .jpeg, rotate, crop and rescale it, and never work on it
> > again.
> So why use GIMP ?
Because I have been using it (mainly to quickly o
On 19/07/2013 21:11, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
You save in .png, of course, which keeps layers intact.
But of course! ;-)
How do you open a .png and show the working layers ?
___
gimp-us
On 07/19/13 15:03, Andrew & Bridget wrote:
Completely useless for the vast majority who only want to quickly open
a camera-produced .jpeg, rotate, crop and rescale it, and never work
on it again.
Cheers,
Ron.
So why use GIMP ?
It's free, unlike Photoshop? And has more features, unlike MS Paint
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Joseph A. Nagy, Jr wrote:
> You save in .png, of course, which keeps layers intact.
But of course! ;-)
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@
On 07/19/13 14:06, Andrew & Bridget wrote:
Most users don't need to use .xcf
So how do you save layers without using .xcf ? and you are presuming
'Most', do the 'Few' save in .psd in Photoshop ?
You save in .png, of course, which keeps layers intact. Again, though,
that is a choice. xc
Completely useless for the vast majority who only want to quickly open a
camera-produced .jpeg, rotate, crop and rescale it, and never work on it again.
Cheers,
Ron.
So why use GIMP ?
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-lis
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 23:33:35 +0400
Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> You've just been assigned a parole officer for openly criticizing the
> team's decisions. He will be living with you for the next 6 months to
> check whether you always export instead of saving, as prescribed by
> the Workflow Commi
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 20:06:47 +0100
Andrew & Bridget wrote:
> > Most users don't need to use .xcf
> So how do you save layers without using .xcf ?
Frankly, Scarlett, I dont give a damn about saving layers.
Almost all the work I do in GIMP is the quick adjustment of camera pictures or
sc
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Renaud OLGIATI wrote:
>> What you call "old save" is the standard now in most editors...
>> I think the choice of this "new save" is mostly ideological: developers
>> want only .xcf
>
> This is what happens when the government looses touch with what the
> people
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 20:38:42 +0200
maderios wrote:
> What you call "old save" is the standard now in most editors...
> I think the choice of this "new save" is mostly ideological: developers
> want only .xcf
This is what happens when the government looses touch with what the people need
or wan
Most users don't need to use .xcf
So how do you save layers without using .xcf ? and you are presuming
'Most', do the 'Few' save in .psd in Photoshop ?
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membershi
On 07/18/2013 11:06 PM, mrule wrote:
I would prefer the "old save" format and add a warning ( that is easily closed
with a keystroke or two ) if the save operation will cause loss of data. This
will result in less loss of work on average.
Hi
What you call "old save" is the standard now in most
> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:22:35 -0400
> From: dan...@yacg.com
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>
> That said, I have noticed GiMP does at least remember your previous
> export action which enables a person t
This is a valid point of human behavior on software. It doesn't matter
how many warnings software might offer, the user develops habits and
eventually, for convenience sake, clicks on things very habitually.
THIS is why malware still gets installed on users' machines despite all
of the UAC an
On 11.05.2013 23:57, relgames wrote:
Was looking for an explanation on why devs changed the default behavior and
found this thread.
Spend couple of hours reading it (and other pages about the change).
You didn't tell if you found
http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/Save_%2B_export_specification
Th
> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 16:07:36 +0100
> From: darkwea...@euirc.eu
> To: mader...@gmail.com; gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>
> Am 2013-03-01 15:50, schrieb maderios:
> > Translation :
> > Only the elite
* Psiweapon [03-01-13 10:46]:
> Pt didn't they sell any higher horses on the cattle fair?
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
>
> > * Psiweapon [03-01-13 10:35]:
> > > I don't want to be very offensive, but yes, *sometimes* it smells of
> > > elitism in here.
> >
> >
Pt didn't they sell any higher horses on the cattle fair?
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Psiweapon [03-01-13 10:35]:
> > I don't want to be very offensive, but yes, *sometimes* it smells of
> > elitism in here.
>
> don't look now, but your post:
> You have top
I'm... actually confident that I will :)
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine <
alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry to hear about that, Psiweapon. Perhaps eventually you'll see
> it differently.
>
> Alexandre
___
gimp-user
I'm sorry to hear about that, Psiweapon. Perhaps eventually you'll see
it differently.
Alexandre
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Psiweapon wrote:
> I don't want to be very offensive, but yes, *sometimes* it smells of elitism
> in here.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:15 PM, maderios wrote:
>>
>>
I don't want to be very offensive, but yes, *sometimes* it smells of
elitism in here.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 4:15 PM, maderios wrote:
> On 03/01/2013 04:09 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:07 PM, darkweasel wrote:
>>
>>> Am 2013-03-01 15:50, schrieb maderios:
>>>
>>>
On 03/01/2013 04:09 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:07 PM, darkweasel wrote:
Am 2013-03-01 15:50, schrieb maderios:
Translation :
Only the elite need gimp, others just need to pay for normal but
commercial editor...
Greetings
I do not understand it like that - did y
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 7:07 PM, darkweasel wrote:
> Am 2013-03-01 15:50, schrieb maderios:
>>
>> Translation :
>> Only the elite need gimp, others just need to pay for normal but
>> commercial editor...
>> Greetings
>
>
> I do not understand it like that - did you actually check out darktable?
Per
Am 2013-03-01 15:50, schrieb maderios:
Translation :
Only the elite need gimp, others just need to pay for normal but
commercial editor...
Greetings
I do not understand it like that - did you actually check out darktable?
It's a free program that seems to fit pbft's workflow. I have a similar
On 02/28/2013 10:05 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:58 AM, pbft wrote:
I just need to make edits on a few hundred JPGs with the least possible effort.
And an old-fashioned image editor is, of course, the best tool for
this kind of job, isn't it?
Translation :
Only
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:02 AM, Daniel wrote:
> Sorry to pipe in here. I hope I am the only "list responder." I'm
> against the behavior, but I'm MORE against further discussion of it.
Ugh, sorry :)
> (But I guess I never said I appreciate GiMP... I do. I teach it to
> others on a regular basi
Sorry to pipe in here. I hope I am the only "list responder." I'm
against the behavior, but I'm MORE against further discussion of it.
So please, if you would like to respond to this comment, let's not
clutter the list any further. I hope the FAQ regarding this and other
topics arrives soon so
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:58 AM, pbft wrote:
> I just need to make edits on a few hundred JPGs with the least possible
> effort.
And an old-fashioned image editor is, of course, the best tool for
this kind of job, isn't it?
What ever do all these nutheads invent lightrooms and darktables for? :
> Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 18:28:56 -0400
> From: j...@jaysmith.com
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>
> I just wish the developers would be open to conversation of how both
> types of workflows could be acc
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> None of the developers gain anything if you use their software, nor do they
> lose anything if you don't.
This is not entirely correct. We gain recognition from publicity when
someone does great work available in public. Recognition of
achievemen
On 8 Aug 2012 07:24, "Jay Smith" wrote:
>
> In summary, IF nearly every one of the developers responses included some
version of the following statement, nearly half of your "long threads"
would vanish and life would be good:
>
>
> "We understand _ presents a difficult situation for some
>
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Ken Warner wrote:
> Your opinions need moderation and you need to be more inclusive rather than
> exclusive.
This is our mailing list. It's not up to you to decide what needs
moderation here.
> The preferences of the developers should always be secondary to the
>
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Ken Warner wrote:
> So you acknowledge that your developer's design decisions might be wrong?
Ken,
This is not a perfect world where perfect people make perfect decisions.
I really wish you stopped making monsters out of us.
Everyone can be wrong. We cannot possi
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> In return, I got back a dismissive reply
You didn't :)
> that IMHO completely ignored the
> intent of what I was trying to say.
If I skip some bits, it doesn't mean that I don't read them or
disagree. It also can mean that I agree and merely re
On 08/07/2012 06:53 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
As many husbands have taken decades to learn (or else they are no longer
married), sometimes "writing all the reasoning down" won't make the wife
feel better. Right now, the developers are resp
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Ken Warner wrote:
> Alexandre,
>
> Just because you write something down doesn't make it right.
>
> Mein Kampf comes to mind.
Ken,
Your unwillingness to try understanding the text you are commenting on
is amusing, but doesn not really encourage a constructive
Alexandre,
Just because you write something down doesn't make it right.
Mein Kampf comes to mind.
On 8/7/2012 2:52 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Anoko wrote:
Its wrong because users don't think that way?
What users? :)
The are no "users in general".
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> As many husbands have taken decades to learn (or else they are no longer
> married), sometimes "writing all the reasoning down" won't make the wife
> feel better. Right now, the developers are responding to an emotional
> situation by saying some
> [..]
>>>User: uh, I just exported it, oh yeah right exporting is not saving. But
>>>it's exported, so my changes are safe. Agree!
>
>>And this is where your use case is wrong! The whole point of
>>separating save and export is that ONLY save is "safe". An export is
>>NOT guaranteed to be either
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Jay Smith wrote:
> IMHO, the "loss of data" situation that the developers were trying to
> prevent with this change was not serious problem for the Gimp target user
> group (advanced users). I doubt those advanced users were having a problem
> before this change.
101 - 200 of 324 matches
Mail list logo
