Re: [Gimp-developer] Export instead save directly
Sounds good to me. I'm more than capable of choosing the correct file extension(s) and settings for myself. I think it's beneficial to have those settings already intelligently defaulted to when saving. I believe it will save some clicking in most workflows. Also good that it can be turned on and off in settings. I'd keep the warning about not having saved an .xcf file of the current doc when closing if there is indeed data to be lost. That will have the same effect as the current [Sorry, you can't Save to a jpeg, please use export instead] warning screen. When I type a file extension, GIMP knows what I want to happen. It should do it dutifully, then warn me at a later time that I should save my project construction file before closing it. +1 from me. -C On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Simone Karin Lehmann wrote: > > > Am 01.03.2016 um 15:05 schrieb C R : > > > > If Save intelligently determines the file format that is most likely to > be > > used to save, Export should not be necessary. Just "Save" and "Save As" > > would suffice. > > > That's nearly exactly what I did with my patched version on > http://gimp.lisanet.de > I even made this a configurable option in the Preferences dialog. > So, if one is interested, have a look at my patches. > > > We could use the "multi layer" & "layer outside layer boundaries" > > I'm currently testing only for 'multiple layers' but it's quite easy to > add other tests. > > > convention to suggest that the user save to xcf, as normal to preserve > what > > they are seeing in the editor. The workflow would just involve flattening > > the image (which also gets rid of alpha) first before saving to make the > > Save default to the imported file format as a save suggestion. This has > the > > advantage of being intuitive and changeable merely by typing the required > > file extension. For my various workflows, 99 times out of 100, it would > not > > be necessary to change anything. > > That was the reason why I did it. And I got a lot of positive feedback > from users of my package. > > > > > I'd be lying if I said the current export convention didn't trip me up > > occasionally. It's been 6 years since I switched completely from > Photoshop, > > so in my case, it's not really blamable on convention anylonger. :) > > > > My 2p. > > > > -C > > > > > > > >> On 1 Mar 2016 8:43 am, "Tobias Ellinghaus" wrote: > >> > >> Am Montag, 29. Februar 2016, 23:57:10 schrieb C R: > That would be terrible. Users not understanding the concept would > >> suddenly > be > facing images where they can just save to JPEG while others can't, but > >> PNG > is > still enabled (because they somehow added an alpha channel), and even > other > images support XCF only (maybe because the layer is bigger than the > image). > >> > >> (I used "just" in the sense of "without any further actions" and not > >> "only".) > >> > >>> No, that's not what I'm suggesting. If you import a jpeg for example, > do > >>> your editing, and end up with an alpha channel somehow, the save could > >>> still default to the .jpg (the jpeg save dialogue could display a > warning > >>> that transparency will be lost). That does not prevent the user from > >>> requesting a .png (by specifying that extension). It also does not > >> prevent > >>> the user saving as an xcf either for that matter. > >>> > >>> When closing the file, if the file is not saved as an xcf, and there is > >>> extra data to be lost, well, the warning about it is there anyway. > >> > >> But that would mean to just go back to the status quo ante, i.e., revert > >> the > >> save/export dichotomy and bring back saving to arbitrary formats. > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>> My 2p. > >>> -C > >> > >> Tobias > >> > >> [...] > >> ___ > >> gimp-developer-list mailing list > >> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org > >> List membership: > >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > >> List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list > > ___ > > gimp-developer-list mailing list > > List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org > > List membership: > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > > List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list > ___ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org > List membership: > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list > ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] Export instead save directly
> Am 01.03.2016 um 15:05 schrieb C R : > > If Save intelligently determines the file format that is most likely to be > used to save, Export should not be necessary. Just "Save" and "Save As" > would suffice. > That's nearly exactly what I did with my patched version on http://gimp.lisanet.de I even made this a configurable option in the Preferences dialog. So, if one is interested, have a look at my patches. > We could use the "multi layer" & "layer outside layer boundaries" I'm currently testing only for 'multiple layers' but it's quite easy to add other tests. > convention to suggest that the user save to xcf, as normal to preserve what > they are seeing in the editor. The workflow would just involve flattening > the image (which also gets rid of alpha) first before saving to make the > Save default to the imported file format as a save suggestion. This has the > advantage of being intuitive and changeable merely by typing the required > file extension. For my various workflows, 99 times out of 100, it would not > be necessary to change anything. That was the reason why I did it. And I got a lot of positive feedback from users of my package. > > I'd be lying if I said the current export convention didn't trip me up > occasionally. It's been 6 years since I switched completely from Photoshop, > so in my case, it's not really blamable on convention anylonger. :) > > My 2p. > > -C > > > >> On 1 Mar 2016 8:43 am, "Tobias Ellinghaus" wrote: >> >> Am Montag, 29. Februar 2016, 23:57:10 schrieb C R: That would be terrible. Users not understanding the concept would >> suddenly be facing images where they can just save to JPEG while others can't, but >> PNG is still enabled (because they somehow added an alpha channel), and even other images support XCF only (maybe because the layer is bigger than the image). >> >> (I used "just" in the sense of "without any further actions" and not >> "only".) >> >>> No, that's not what I'm suggesting. If you import a jpeg for example, do >>> your editing, and end up with an alpha channel somehow, the save could >>> still default to the .jpg (the jpeg save dialogue could display a warning >>> that transparency will be lost). That does not prevent the user from >>> requesting a .png (by specifying that extension). It also does not >> prevent >>> the user saving as an xcf either for that matter. >>> >>> When closing the file, if the file is not saved as an xcf, and there is >>> extra data to be lost, well, the warning about it is there anyway. >> >> But that would mean to just go back to the status quo ante, i.e., revert >> the >> save/export dichotomy and bring back saving to arbitrary formats. >> >> [...] >> >>> My 2p. >>> -C >> >> Tobias >> >> [...] >> ___ >> gimp-developer-list mailing list >> List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org >> List membership: >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list >> List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list > ___ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org > List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] Export instead save directly
If Save intelligently determines the file format that is most likely to be used to save, Export should not be necessary. Just "Save" and "Save As" would suffice. We could use the "multi layer" & "layer outside layer boundaries" convention to suggest that the user save to xcf, as normal to preserve what they are seeing in the editor. The workflow would just involve flattening the image (which also gets rid of alpha) first before saving to make the Save default to the imported file format as a save suggestion. This has the advantage of being intuitive and changeable merely by typing the required file extension. For my various workflows, 99 times out of 100, it would not be necessary to change anything. I'd be lying if I said the current export convention didn't trip me up occasionally. It's been 6 years since I switched completely from Photoshop, so in my case, it's not really blamable on convention anylonger. :) My 2p. -C On 1 Mar 2016 8:43 am, "Tobias Ellinghaus" wrote: > Am Montag, 29. Februar 2016, 23:57:10 schrieb C R: > > > That would be terrible. Users not understanding the concept would > suddenly > > > be > > > facing images where they can just save to JPEG while others can't, but > PNG > > > is > > > still enabled (because they somehow added an alpha channel), and even > > > other > > > images support XCF only (maybe because the layer is bigger than the > > > image). > > (I used "just" in the sense of "without any further actions" and not > "only".) > > > No, that's not what I'm suggesting. If you import a jpeg for example, do > > your editing, and end up with an alpha channel somehow, the save could > > still default to the .jpg (the jpeg save dialogue could display a warning > > that transparency will be lost). That does not prevent the user from > > requesting a .png (by specifying that extension). It also does not > prevent > > the user saving as an xcf either for that matter. > > > > When closing the file, if the file is not saved as an xcf, and there is > > extra data to be lost, well, the warning about it is there anyway. > > But that would mean to just go back to the status quo ante, i.e., revert > the > save/export dichotomy and bring back saving to arbitrary formats. > > [...] > > > My 2p. > > -C > > Tobias > > [...] > ___ > gimp-developer-list mailing list > List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org > List membership: > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list > List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list > > ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] Export instead save directly
Am Montag, 29. Februar 2016, 23:57:10 schrieb C R: > > That would be terrible. Users not understanding the concept would suddenly > > be > > facing images where they can just save to JPEG while others can't, but PNG > > is > > still enabled (because they somehow added an alpha channel), and even > > other > > images support XCF only (maybe because the layer is bigger than the > > image). (I used "just" in the sense of "without any further actions" and not "only".) > No, that's not what I'm suggesting. If you import a jpeg for example, do > your editing, and end up with an alpha channel somehow, the save could > still default to the .jpg (the jpeg save dialogue could display a warning > that transparency will be lost). That does not prevent the user from > requesting a .png (by specifying that extension). It also does not prevent > the user saving as an xcf either for that matter. > > When closing the file, if the file is not saved as an xcf, and there is > extra data to be lost, well, the warning about it is there anyway. But that would mean to just go back to the status quo ante, i.e., revert the save/export dichotomy and bring back saving to arbitrary formats. [...] > My 2p. > -C Tobias [...] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
Re: [Gimp-developer] Export instead save directly
Hello Pavel, On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:21:49 +0100 pa...@pamsoft.cz wrote: > 2. Do you know some photo/image viewer which can display xcf files? I am not > aware of any. Maybe there is some, but it is not important at the moment. The > important message is, that poeple (I appologise to Alex for speaking on > behalf of other peaple than I am) usually don't want to store they images as > xcf. I bet most often they want to load their JPEG from their camera, make > some edits, color enhancemnts, etc. and SAVE it back as JPEG. That's all. [snip] XnView (MP version at least) does show xcf :-). Regards, -- wwp pgptvZTMo5O2k.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address:gimp-developer-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
