Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-07-17 Thread Richard Gitschlag

 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 to 2.6 is the lame 
impossibility to choose page format: portrait or landscape.
 
 http://i.imgur.com/cb85t.jpg
 
 Alexandre Prokoudine
 http://libregraphicsworld.org
 ___
 gimp-user-list mailing list
 gimp-user-list@gnome.org
 https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Bundling that under the Print command when nearly every other application 
that ever existed keeps them as separate commands may not be a good design 
choice here.  Granted, unlike word processors GIMP generally doesn't have to 
deal with pagination, but it would be like ...  I dunno, bundling the Save 
command as a checkbox inside the Save As dialog.

-- Stratadrake
strata_ran...@hotmail.com

Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.



  ___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-07-16 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
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 appreciated :)

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-07-02 Thread Richard Gitschlag


 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 visual feedback perhaps, like changing the color of the actual bar,
 or something more obvious. Still, it's tough to quickly just do what 
you need. Other options: shift or ctrl drag for fine tuning, or just 
slow it down once it gets below a user set size.
 
  I also really miss simple checkboxes for tablet dynamics, much quicker than 
 a menu of presets.
 

 Personally I love everything else, but these two things are a bigger 
part of mt digital painting workflow than the rest, so 2.6 is back. 

1 - The only weird part about the sliders (to me) is how dragging along the 
upper half adjusts the value along the slider's whole range, while dragging 
along the bottom half adjusts relative to the current value. That definitely 
takes getting used to.

2 - Indeed, brush dynamics are not as easy to adjust in 2.8 as they were in 2.6 
:(  You can hit the Edit button, unfortunately now that dynamics are made into 
their own resource type this means you can't just edit them any time you 
want, you have to Duplicate one of them before you will have a customizable 
dynamics matrix.  Smooth sailing once you do that, though.

-- Stratadrake
strata_ran...@hotmail.com

Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

  ___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-07-01 Thread Richard Gitschlag




 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 strata_ran...@hotmail.com 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 statement?

 John

If I may sort my mail folder by conversation:

- HATE the new Save vs Export behavior - (120+ emails and apparently still 
counting)
- Bring back normal handing of other file formats (60+ emails)
- GIMP 2.8.0 - saving in .jpg or .png h (50+ emails)
- present xcf as what it is, a GIMP project file format (45 emails)
- Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to GIMP 2.6 - (20+ emails)

Yes :)

-- Stratadrake
strata_ran...@hotmail.com

Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

  ___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread 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 
 file name (i.e. including the path) of an image and to paste it to the open 
 file view of GIMP... Not possible anymore? Why? Progress IMHO is if 
 possibilities grow, not if they disappear.

Did you search the dialog? Did you see the large button Type a file
name in the top left corner?

 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 JPEG again? Progress 
 IMHO is if things get easier, not if they get more complicated.

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.

 3.) The calculation of the image size of JPEGs when saving in preview mode is 
 buggy, i.e. the size is way too high (GBs instead if MBs). Of course, this is 
 only a minor bug which will be fixed soon (if it isn't already). I just 
 wanted to note it.

This is a known bug, hopefully fixed very soon.

Do you really think these three points, one of them does not exist,
and another one is a very small point and a known bug, are enough for
not having access to the tremendous new capabilities of version 2.8?

-- 
Olivier Lecarme
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Jernej Simončič
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 seem
to have some kind of contest on how to make the file dialogs more
frustrating to use.

-- 
 Jernej Simončič  http://eternallybored.org/ 

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Johannes
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 file name (i.e. including the path) of an image and to paste it to 
 the open file view of GIMP... Not possible anymore? Why? Progress IMHO is 
 if possibilities grow, not if they disappear.
 
 Did you search the dialog? Did you see the large button Type a file
 name in the top left corner?

In the German version of GIMP-2.8.0 (on Windows 7) this button is named
Suche (search) and has a loupe icon. Maybe this is the reason why I
did not find it. I did not want to search, I wanted to point directly to
where the file resides. But thank you for the hint!

However, okay, there is a possibility to do this very basic use case I
want, but it has become a lot more complicated, compared to GIMP 2.6.x.
Please have a look (assuming I have a fully qualified file name in the
clipboard):

In GIMP-2.6.x, I do:
1.Ctrl-o
2.Ctrl-v
3.Enter

In Gimp-2.8.0, I have to do:
1.Ctrl-o
2.Cursor-Left
3.Cursor-Up
4.Ctrl-v
5.Enter

Just try these key flows some times to get a feeling of how complicated
it is now.

With the mouse (which is not my prefered way to do this use case,
because it's a lot less efficient), there is also one click and a couple
of mouse cursor inches more to do.



 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 JPEG again? 
 Progress IMHO is if things get easier, not if they get more complicated.
 
 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 don't want to complain, but to express my personal opinion, because I
like the GIMP. Changing the file type and forcing the user into another
use case just isn't my style, and it will never be.

Besides, it makes me think that GIMP assumes the user is a fool who is
not aware that there will be some limitations with JPEG compared to XCF.



 3.) The calculation of the image size of JPEGs when saving in preview mode 
 is buggy, i.e. the size is way too high (GBs instead if MBs). Of course, 
 this is only a minor bug which will be fixed soon (if it isn't already). I 
 just wanted to note it.
 
 This is a known bug, hopefully fixed very soon.
 
 Do you really think these three points, one of them does not exist,
 and another one is a very small point and a known bug, are enough for
 not having access to the tremendous new capabilities of version 2.8?
 

The basic use cases are the most important to me, as soon as I will have
a real need for the new capabilities of GIMP, I will rethink upgrading.
Maybe, the opening of files will again be easier then.


Johannes

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Frank Gore
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 been trying... I've spent
weeks trying to get used to this new way of doing things. And yet
every single day, I get nailed by it yet again. And every time I do, I
scream out loud in frustration. It's the single-most aggravating new
feature of Gimp. I despise it to no end. That one feature is almost
enough to make me want to downgrade to Gimp 2.6, just as many others
have done. A few more screams, and I just might.

--
Frank Gore
THE place to talk photography!
www.FriendlyPhotoZone.com
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Richard Gitschlag


  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 JPEG 
  again? Progress IMHO is if things get easier, not if they get more 
  complicated.
  
  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 don't want to complain, but to express my personal opinion, because I
 like the GIMP. Changing the file type and forcing the user into another
 use case just isn't my style, and it will never be.
 
 Besides, it makes me think that GIMP assumes the user is a fool who is
 not aware that there will be some limitations with JPEG compared to XCF.
 

The decision to split XCF from standard file formats during saving operations 
was not arbitrary.  It just wasn't given enough public exposure before release, 
and this is the aftermath of mishandling the all-important PR side of things.  
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.

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 fine, but I guess a lot of people just used Save As... with a 
different file extension, result being that GIMP does not ask to save changes 
back to their XCF file (since after a 2.6 Save As, the open document is not 
guaranteed to be associated with an XCF file on disk) when they shut GIMP down, 
resulting in some very real loss of time and effort.

The Save/Export distinction is relatively easy to adjust to if you just keep 
telling yourself to hit Ctrl+E instead of Ctrl+S.  Then you will be able to 
output standard file formats in no more time than 2.6 required, and with FEWER 
prompts and warnings than 2.6 too (remember the constant nags about losing 
transparency and multiple layers?  Gone in 2.8.)  Yes it is a very breaking 
change for some users, but if you take a moment to work with the new system 
you'll actually get things done faster.

I am not all that thrilled with the new distinction either, but for me it 
doesn't outweigh the other new features that 2.8 adds, one of the biggest being 
its new single-window mode.


-- Stratadrake
strata_ran...@hotmail.com

Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.


  ___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
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. including the path) of an image and to paste it
 to the open file view of GIMP... Not possible anymore? Why?
 Progress IMHO is if possibilities grow, not if they disappear.

Apart from switching view you can also:

a) drag'n'drop the file to gimp's window onto the toolbar
b) drag'n'drop the file onto Open file dialog

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread John Coppens
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 question. It's easy to say 'there is
a silent majority who says...'. I can always say 'I changed this, and
almost everyone is fine with it' because I don't get any feedback.

Why not do a _real_ poll on the opinion of the users re: the new
'save feature'?

John
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
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 silent majority who says...'. I can always say 'I changed this, and
 almost everyone is fine with it' because I don't get any feedback.

You obviously didn't understand a bit from the initial statement made
by Richard.

Let's read it again:

most of the people who like it have nothing much to say about the subject.

Most of the people _who like it_, not just most of the people.

 Why not do a _real_ poll on the opinion of the users re: the new
 'save feature'?

What ever for?

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
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
 people who do not express their opinion. You effectively say:

 'The people who say nothing much on the subject, like it change'.

No, I don't effectively say that and I'm asking you to stop
attributing things I didn't say or mean to me.

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Francesco Scaglioni
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 adjustments necessary 
in either rawstudio or darktable. For those special images a default save to 
xcf suits me absolutely fine. 

Just my 2d worth. 


Francesco




---
(Apologies for brevity, top posting and poor citation - this email was sent 
from a mobile device)
---
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Daniel Smith
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 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 adjustments
 necessary in either rawstudio or darktable. For those special images a
 default save to xcf suits me absolutely fine.

 Just my 2d worth.


 Francesco




 ---
 (Apologies for brevity, top posting and poor citation - this email was sent
 from a mobile device)
 ---
 ___
 gimp-user-list mailing list
 gimp-user-list@gnome.org
 https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Oon-Ee Ng
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 sentiments to
 people who do not express their opinion. You effectively say:

 'The people who say nothing much on the subject, like it change'.

I think it's generally acceptable to all that this particular conversion
had been dominated by a relative handful of loud complainers. Besides the
original thread, the other ones which keep popping up seem to indicate
authors which have specifically signed up for this list to rant (since they
obviously did not read the previous complaints).

It gets boring after a while, more so for devs even. Just give it a rest
and stop using gimp if this is such a pain. Despite the noise, I haven't
actually seen much evidence for there being a significant number affected.
Not that an open source project is necessarily a democracy anyway.

 So, how do you know, if they don't say anything, that they actually
 _like_ it? Maybe they don't like it, but don't want to add to the
 'hundreds of mails already exchanged about the matter'.


___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Johannes


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 raw to jpeg then I would simply do all adjustments 
necessary in either rawstudio or darktable. For those special images a default 
save to xcf suits me absolutely fine.


The question is whether your opinion is targeted at the same scenario.

Of course, if you come from RAW or XCF, then everything is fine, as you 
are only forced to stay(!) in XCF (which is the format you want in 
this scenario).


But, the scenario I am talking about is coming from JPEG, manipulating 
the image in a single GIMP session and finally saving it to JPEG again. 
If you are in this workflow, then getting forced to change the image 
format to XCF is annoying. There could at least be an option to diable 
this smart-alecky behaviour.


Besides, if you have just exported(!) the JPEG to a JPEG file in GIMP 
2.8.0, you cannot directly close the image file afterwards. Instead, you 
get an (annoying) dialogue asking to save the image as a XCF.



And another one (according to the first topic of my first posting): 
Pasting a fully qualified file name into the search text field does 
not work reliably if the MS Windows indexing service is not enabled. 
This leads to an error message... That's not cool, is it?


--
Johannes

___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
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://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list


Re: [Gimp-user] Why I went back from GIMP 2.8 to 2.6.x

2012-06-30 Thread Steve Kinney
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 vehemently
registered, end of story.

And yes, I understand that the single window configuration can be
turned off easily.  About as easily as control-s and control-alt-s
can be mapped to export as instead of save as .xcf if memory
serves... there's even a GUI interface for remapping key bindings.
I personally LOVE the fact that the GIMP can be so extensively
customized.

I stayed on the list and still post for several reasons:

1)  To watch progress toward the big new release.

2)  After the event, to follow current reports that will indicate
when it is safe to upgrade in an occasionally intensive production
environment with some high priority deadlines.

3)  Because from time to time somebody asks a question I can answer,
and that's my kind of fun.  Not to mention learning from other
people's answers, and maybe asking a few questions myself.

4)  And for posts like this:

 On 06/30/2012 07:47 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
 It's a doacracy :)

I used to do a lot of technical and engineering work and I really
miss the twistid humor, pointed barbs and all.  Normal people, so
called, just don't get it.  Again, my kind of fun.

:o)

Steve


___
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list