> 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 wrote:
>
>
> From my own part, what decid
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 8:51 PM, pitibonom 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 appreciated :)
Alexandre P
> 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
mo
> Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 03:23:23 -0700
> From: kwarner...@verizon.net
> To: strata_ran...@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x
>
> > Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.
>
> nor do they expl
> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 12:10:32 -0300
> From: j...@jcoppens.com
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x
>
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 07:45:13 -0700
> Richard Gitschlag wrote:
>
> > There have been hundreds o
On 06/30/2012 07:30 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> authors which have specifically signed up for this list to rant
> (since they obviously did not read the previous complaints).
I resemble that remark: I joined up to rant about the single window
"innovation." I did rant. But only once. Opinion veheme
On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote:
> Not that an open source project is necessarily a democracy anyway.
It's a doacracy :)
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https:/
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 bulk
On Jul 1, 2012 12:24 AM, "John Coppens" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:01:32 +0400
> Alexandre Prokoudine 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
> people who do not express
Can't we all get along?
http://abcnews.go.com/meta/search/imageDetail?format=plain&source=http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ap_obit_rodney_king_swimming_pool_jt_120617
Thanks,
Dan
On 6/30/12, Francesco Scaglioni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I seem to be in a minority opinion on this list. For my workflow the n
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 adjustm
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 12:55:50 +0200
Jernej Simončič wrote:
> > Did you search the dialog? Did you see the large button "Type a file
> > name" in the top left corner?
>
> It's not there while you're in the (totally and completely useless) Recent
> files view. You have to switch to some other folde
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 8:24 PM, John Coppens wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:01:32 +0400
> Alexandre Prokoudine 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
> people who do not expre
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 20:01:32 +0400
Alexandre Prokoudine 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
people who do not express their opinion. You effectively say:
'The people who say noth
On 06/30/2012 11:54 AM, John Coppens wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 19:19:13 +0400
> Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> Why not do a _real_ poll on the opinion of the users re: the new
> 'save feature'?
I have not seen the new "save" function yet - I use the GIMP for
daily production work and I find it
Am 30.06.2012 16:45, schrieb Richard Gitschlag:
> The problem with 2.6 was when people were working on multi-layer
> compositions and they save a copy in a standard file format (and I am
> not going to argue semantics of the word "save" here) ... if you used
> "Save a Copy" then everything was fin
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
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 19:19:13 +0400
Alexandre Prokoudine 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 'the
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 7:10 PM, John Coppens wrote:
>> There have been hundreds of emails on this topic already - and mind the fact
>> that most of the people who like it have nothing much to say about the
>> subject.
>
> That is just wishful thinking... Dp you have stats to prove that
> statem
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 07:45:13 -0700
Richard Gitschlag wrote:
> There have been hundreds of emails on this topic already - and mind the fact
> that most of the people who like it have nothing much to say about the
> subject.
That is just wishful thinking... Dp you have stats to prove that
statem
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:35 PM, 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. including
> >> 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
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Olivier 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 been trying... I'
Am 30.06.2012 12:01, schrieb Olivier:
> 2012/6/30 :
>> 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 nam
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 12:01:20 +0200, Olivier wrote:
> Did you search the dialog? Did you see the large button "Type a file
> name" in the top left corner?
It's not there while you're in the (totally and completely useless) Recent
files view. You have to switch to some other folder first. GTK+ devs
2012/6/30 :
> 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. including the path) of an image and t
26 matches
Mail list logo
