Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:08:29 +0400
From: alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:51 PM, pitibonom for...@gimpusers.com wrote:
From my own part, what decided me to get back
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:51 PM, pitibonom for...@gimpusers.com wrote:
From my own part, what decided me to get back to 2.6 is the lame
impossibility to choose page format: portrait or landscape.
http://i.imgur.com/cb85t.jpg
GL for your future lame choices developpers !
Thx, much
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 02:17:04 +0200
From: for...@gimpusers.com
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
CC: t...@gimpusers.com
Subject: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x
Why I switched back to 2.6:
Sliders- too weird for digital painting with a tablet. I would like
more
Am 30.06.2012 12:01, schrieb Olivier:
2012/6/30 anonfo...@gmx.org:
These are the reasons why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to GIMP 2.6.x:
1.) The free text field in the Open file view has been removed, or at
least I couldn't find it. A frequent use case for me is to copy a fully
qualified
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Olivier oleca...@gmail.com wrote:
About this point, please refer to the hundreds of mails already
exchanged about the matter, and please really try the new behavior,
without assuming bad thinking from the developers.
I read all the emails about this. And I've
2.) I open a JPEG and I want to save(!) it as JPEG. Why is GIMP starting
to domineer over the user now (like e.g. MS Windows has been doing all the
time) by changing the file type to XCF and forcing the user to export
the image (that was opened as a JPEG!) if he wants to save it as a
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:35 PM, anonfo...@gmx.org wrote:
These are the reasons why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to GIMP 2.6.x:
1.) The free text field in the Open file view has been removed, or at
least I couldn't find it. A frequent use case for me is to copy a fully
qualified file name (i.e.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 19:19:13 +0400
Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote:
Stats that there have been hundreds of mails?
That most people who like it have nothing much to say about it?
Do _you_ have stats that prove the opposite? :)
No Alexandre... This was a serious
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 7:54 PM, John Coppens wrote:
Stats that there have been hundreds of mails?
That most people who like it have nothing much to say about it?
Do _you_ have stats that prove the opposite? :)
No Alexandre... This was a serious question. It's easy to say 'there is
a
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:24 PM, John Coppens wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:01:32 +0400
Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote:
most of the people who like it have nothing much to say about the subject.
Which means that _you_ take the liberty of assigning sentiments to
Hi,
I seem to be in a minority opinion on this list. For my workflow the new
behaviour is great. Raw to GIMP, work on image for a bit, saves as xcf, come
back another time, do more work on xcf and when finally happy export to jpeg.
If I wanted bulk raw to jpeg then I would simply do all
Can't we all get along?
http://abcnews.go.com/meta/search/imageDetail?format=plainsource=http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ap_obit_rodney_king_swimming_pool_jt_120617
Thanks,
Dan
On 6/30/12, Francesco Scaglioni f...@mossdog.net wrote:
Hi,
I seem to be in a minority opinion on this list. For my
On Jul 1, 2012 12:24 AM, John Coppens j...@jcoppens.com wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:01:32 +0400
Alexandre Prokoudine alexandre.prokoud...@gmail.com wrote:
most of the people who like it have nothing much to say about the
subject.
Which means that _you_ take the liberty of assigning
Am 30.06.2012 23:06, schrieb Francesco Scaglioni:
I seem to be in a minority opinion on this list. For my workflow the new behaviour is great. Raw to
GIMP, work on image for a bit, saves as xcf, come back another time, do more work on xcf and when
finally happy export to jpeg. If I wanted
14 matches
Mail list logo
