Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On 08/09/2013 01:30 PM, pbft wrote: > This thread is like a wound that won't heal - I keep picking the scab even > though I know I should just let it be. > > For me, it seems that there are well-established precedents for this type of > situation, and in general it would be better to follow precedent where > reasonable. It's generally better when tools behave the way you expect. > > In the spreadsheet example above, it's absolutely true that if you open a csv, > add some fomulas, and save as a csv you will lose the formulas. Pretty good > analogy to the topic at hand. > > The spreadsheets that I'm familiar with all do the same basic thing in this > situation: > > 1: They default to saving the file in the same format to the same file name as > you opened in the first place > 2: They warn you that if you accept this default behavior, you may lose some > data > > OO also gives you the option to have it remind you every time or not. > > >From my outsider perspective, that seems like a clean, simple, and logical > approach that would avoid unwanted data loss and conform more closely with the > de facto standard for this situation. Seems obvious to me, and it's baffling > that this has become such a shouting match. Didn't have to be that way. > I know what you mean as I'm picking at that same scab. :) lol A couple of weeks ago, I stumbled upon a similar behavior in MS Word 2010. I had created a document that I wanted to save as a PDF file. I used the "Save As" function to do so. The PDF file got saved and Adobe Reader was opened to show me the PDF file was properly created. Cool. So, being happy with my new PDF file, I closed the Word window because I was "done" with my task (mission accomplished!). Low and behold, Word informed me I had "unsaved changes" and offered me the chance to save them. At first, I was surprised since I had _just_ saved the document to PDF format. Then, the light bulb went off. What I learned was this: Word was prompting me to save the "unsaved changes" because I had not, yet, saved my document in a file which Word could readily open for edit such that I could resume my editing. When I saved another test document in OpenDocument format and closed the Word window, Word did _not_ prompt me to save the "unsaved changes" because Word considers "OpenDocument" files to be "editable" where the PDF file isn't. I liken the PDF file to a JPEG or PNG image. Gimp will export the current image to JPEG or PNG formats but once I do so, I will save the image in a format that Gimp doesn't consider "editable". If I open a JPEG image in Gimp, at some text to it, and export it as a JPEG, I can't change the text I added to _that_ image. I either have to start over, if I can, or find creative ways to edit that text. Once I went through the above experience with MS Word, I got a better understanding of the new export behavior and I actually like it better now. Now, my "habit" will be to simply save the file each time I edit it and when I need a JPEG or PNG file, I'll export one at that time and for that specific intended use. If I can train myself in this way, there won't be any more times when I've saved an image file I can no longer update or edit in the future, provided the XCF file doesn't get corrupt. :) lol On a side note, I conducted another experiment, before my MS Word experience, in MS Works. I created a document, used "Save As" to save it as a Rich Text file and when I closed Works, it prompted me to save my "unsaved changes". Peace... Tom -- /When we dance, you have a way with me, Stay with me... Sway with me.../ ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
This thread is like a wound that won't heal - I keep picking the scab even though I know I should just let it be. For me, it seems that there are well-established precedents for this type of situation, and in general it would be better to follow precedent where reasonable. It's generally better when tools behave the way you expect. In the spreadsheet example above, it's absolutely true that if you open a csv, add some fomulas, and save as a csv you will lose the formulas. Pretty good analogy to the topic at hand. The spreadsheets that I'm familiar with all do the same basic thing in this situation: 1: They default to saving the file in the same format to the same file name as you opened in the first place 2: They warn you that if you accept this default behavior, you may lose some data OO also gives you the option to have it remind you every time or not. >From my outsider perspective, that seems like a clean, simple, and logical approach that would avoid unwanted data loss and conform more closely with the de facto standard for this situation. Seems obvious to me, and it's baffling that this has become such a shouting match. Didn't have to be that way. -- pbft (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
Either way, this is a much more civil argument then "you developers are doodieheads for not doing it my way" aka the way this thread started in the first place. On 8/9/2013 1:44 PM, Ofnuts wrote: On 08/09/2013 09:09 PM, Daniel wrote: On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 21:02 +0200, Ofnuts wrote: On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote: It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. Load a jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg format ( though it degrades the image quality at each save, but this is another question ) is red by ALL tools, unlike xcf that cannot even be used as import in any tool. Hmmm. * Open your favorite spreadsheet application. * Load a CSV. * Create complicated formulas to compute more values. * Save as CSV, "naturally" Oops. What were these formulas again? Sorry, but that's a really bad argument for Gimp. After all, much metadata is lost when it imports photos and other images which contain metadata. Please be specific. If I: - load a JPG in Gimp (2.8.2 Linux ADM64) - save as XCF - exit Gimp - restart Gimp - open saved XCF - export as JPG - run "exiftool -l" on both original and re-saved JPG, redirecting to file - diff the two Exif file I don't see any difference between the two Exif files that cannot be explained by the editing (portrait image gets rotated, for instance). But all the original Exif data (shot date, focal length, lens manufacturer, whatever...) is still there. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
First off, I have been using Gimp ever since 0.9.something, it's still
my most used GNU/Linux desktop application, and I did quite some cursing
the very day the new save/export behaviour was introduced - but mainly
because, in the end, it broke a workflow I was used to.
Am 09.08.2013 21:09, schrieb Daniel:
* Open your favorite spreadsheet application. * Load a CSV. *
Create complicated formulas to compute more values. * Save as
CSV, "naturally"
Oops. What were these formulas again?
Well, actually, that's the very point in my opinion. The same way I used
to be nagged by the save/export, I then and now got annoyed by the
application repeatedly asking me "dumb"(?) questions ("flatten" and the
like) when trying to save an image making excessive use of layers and
channels to a JPG file.
Sorry, but that's a really bad argument for Gimp. After all, much
metadata is lost when it imports photos and other images which
contain metadata.
While I agree here, to me, this is a wholly different point and more
about, well, preserving image metadata and eventually doing so in xcf too.
And if someone wants to be clever about it, then if there is data or
format changes of the image for which data may be lost or the
original format cannot handle, then XCF should be selected as the
target format when saving. (for example, the original image was RAW
or JPEG and the image changes call for an alpha channel, or perhaps a
layer has been added to the original image.)
Which, in the end, might make it hard to predict what will _actually_ be
saved as eventually channels and layers are added by plugins or
extensions without the user consciously aware of it. Personally, I
wouldn't like this very much... ;)
And I understand not wanting the program to do too much thinking for
the users because it can simply get in the way, but the new change
already crosses that line by thinking for the user that every file
should be saved into XCF format and of course, the user loses all
metadata.
As stated above - this should be a different thing; losing metadata
without explicitely telling Gimp to dump them ain't a good thing but
eventually should be treated differently; if the only reason not to, by
default, save to xcf is metadata getting lost, then it should better be
about preserving metadata at least while storing xcf or exporting a
processed image. Yes, I also initially felt pretty offended by the new
save/export, yet at the moment, it just makes things clearer, just as
the csv/spreadsheet example, or saving .odt vs. exporting .pdf in
LibreOffice - it makes more sensitive that storing to, say, JPG or PNG
does not just write image output using a lossy compression but also
means losing a lot of processing information, such as layers, channels,
..., all along the way. It's simply clearer - and in situations in which
I just want JPG, I just export without saving.
Just my $0.02 of course...
Kristian
___
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On 08/09/2013 09:09 PM, Daniel wrote: On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 21:02 +0200, Ofnuts wrote: On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote: It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. Load a jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg format ( though it degrades the image quality at each save, but this is another question ) is red by ALL tools, unlike xcf that cannot even be used as import in any tool. Hmmm. * Open your favorite spreadsheet application. * Load a CSV. * Create complicated formulas to compute more values. * Save as CSV, "naturally" Oops. What were these formulas again? Sorry, but that's a really bad argument for Gimp. After all, much metadata is lost when it imports photos and other images which contain metadata. Please be specific. If I: - load a JPG in Gimp (2.8.2 Linux ADM64) - save as XCF - exit Gimp - restart Gimp - open saved XCF - export as JPG - run "exiftool -l" on both original and re-saved JPG, redirecting to file - diff the two Exif file I don't see any difference between the two Exif files that cannot be explained by the editing (portrait image gets rotated, for instance). But all the original Exif data (shot date, focal length, lens manufacturer, whatever...) is still there. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On Fri, 2013-08-09 at 21:02 +0200, Ofnuts wrote: > On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote: > > It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. > > Load a > > jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg > > format ( though it degrades the image quality at each save, but this is > > another > > question ) is red by ALL tools, unlike xcf that cannot even be used as > > import in > > any tool. > > Hmmm. > > * Open your favorite spreadsheet application. > * Load a CSV. > * Create complicated formulas to compute more values. > * Save as CSV, "naturally" > > Oops. What were these formulas again? > Sorry, but that's a really bad argument for Gimp. After all, much metadata is lost when it imports photos and other images which contain metadata. Seriously, ideally, Gimp should save in the format of the file that was opened INCLUDING the metadata. And if someone wants to be clever about it, then if there is data or format changes of the image for which data may be lost or the original format cannot handle, then XCF should be selected as the target format when saving. (for example, the original image was RAW or JPEG and the image changes call for an alpha channel, or perhaps a layer has been added to the original image.) And I understand not wanting the program to do too much thinking for the users because it can simply get in the way, but the new change already crosses that line by thinking for the user that every file should be saved into XCF format and of course, the user loses all metadata. (And before anyone offers it, I will acknowledge, the metadata would be preserved if the original source image is unchanged true but not the point.) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>s.kortenweg (s.korten...@hccnet.nl) wrote: >Compared to 50 years ago there has been a drastic change however: >Typically there is more than one user per program... > >Bye, >Simon Exact, things changed. We were able to have a better use of our softwares, of our possibilities on computers, etc. But these 2 rules are still available. Finally, a software is like a website, according to these 2 rules. Everywhere on the Internet, the HTML/CSS/PHP tutorials are asking novice developpers to create websites that *everybody* can find usefull and functionnal (even those who use Internet Explorer!) And now, we even have to figure out our websites for tablets and mobiles!… Moreover, sometimes, people can do the choices they want. On internet forums, users can choose their nicknames, their profile-picture, their description, etc. What does that mean? It means that "everybody must be happy using the website". And find the website fuctionnal. And this part works the same for softwares. Please give people the choice; the only risk I can see it to make more people happy to use Gimp… that's just it… -- Sam_ (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On 08/09/2013 12:42 PM, pitibonom wrote: It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. Load a jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg format ( though it degrades the image quality at each save, but this is another question ) is red by ALL tools, unlike xcf that cannot even be used as import in any tool. Hmmm. * Open your favorite spreadsheet application. * Load a CSV. * Create complicated formulas to compute more values. * Save as CSV, "naturally" Oops. What were these formulas again? ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
s.kortenweg (s.korten...@hccnet.nl) wrote: > When i started 50 years ago in the early days of IT as prof was me > told that there are 2 rules for program developers : first keep it > simple and second the user must be happy with the results of your > work. Compared to 50 years ago there has been a drastic change however: Typically there is more than one user per program... Bye, Simon -- si...@budig.de http://simon.budig.de/ ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
When i started 50 years ago in the early days of IT as prof was me told that there are 2 rules for program developers : first keep it simple and second the user must be happy with the results of your work. In the endless discussion of export vs. Save i believe that the second rule is violated. For me i can live with it. It is not nice but i dont believe that the old situation will return. On my dual boot system (W7 and Linux) GIMP 2.6 is installed on W7 and GIMP 2.8 on Linux. In major i use GIMP 2.6 with Photoshop als reserve. This my comment. S. Korteweg. ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:07 PM, pitibonom wrote: > really amazing Alexandre, the feeling you give me that am speaking to some > kind > of deity :D Would you like to repent while at that? :) > Mebe in your supreme knowledge and power you could convince other companies > like > unity, adobe, microsoft, or some other real awesome dev team making blender, > krita etc ( they all are legions ) to use and handle the xcf format :-) I'm afraid that you failed to understand the intention behind this change. This is not meant to enforce XCF on companies. Besides, should we suggest Adobe to implement support for some open file format, it would most likely be OpenRaster. Also, may I draw your attention to the fact that Krita and Blender already read XCF (via an extension in case of Blender)? Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>Wait till you get "handcuffs" or "ball and chain" :) >You are. >Because we choose to work on it. >As if we didn't know :) > >Alexandre Prokoudine >http://libregraphicsworld.org really amazing Alexandre, the feeling you give me that am speaking to some kind of deity :D Mebe in your supreme knowledge and power you could convince other companies like unity, adobe, microsoft, or some other real awesome dev team making blender, krita etc ( they all are legions ) to use and handle the xcf format :-) This would make the save/export choice pretty convenient and wise :) If you don't wanna change, mebe the rest of the world could or should ? respectfully :-) -- pitibonom (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:59 PM, pitibonom wrote: > Finally am wondering wether there's still a branch of the 2.6 version that is > active ? There's no such thing to the best of my knowledge. > Is there even the possibility to download the old 2.6 somewhere ? Yes, of course. > Ah it seems yes, but it's not on gimp.org. Because it doesn't make sense to us advertising older software that doesn't have all the latest fixes. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
Finally am wondering wether there's still a branch of the 2.6 version that is active ? Does anyone know ? Or is there only the standard current 2.8.x trunc ? Of course for ppl who don't like the 2.8, noone forces them to use it, but then the question is asked about the older versions. Is there even the possibility to download the old 2.6 somewhere ? Ah it seems yes, but it's not on gimp.org. So finally the only question is wether this version is still in dev from a team that is not the 2.8 team. regards. -- pitibonom (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:42 PM, pitibonom wrote: > EDIT: amazing the captcha of this posting window is 'dictatorship' :D a subtle > message ? ;-) Wait till you get "handcuffs" or "ball and chain" :) > so as a conclusion you mean that because it's free, it's allowed to be not > functionnal. Am i wrong ? You are. > Then why does it exist ? Because we choose to work on it. > just make gimp licensed, and you'll really see where > are the customers and > who is happy with the interface. As if we didn't know :) Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
>Second! > >I for one appreciate what the GIMP developers have worked so hard to >produce. Spectacular program for the price! > >Stuart Rauh > > >-Original Message- >From: gimp-user-list [mailto:gimp-user-list-boun...@gnome.org] On >Behalf Of Patrick Shanahan >Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:48 PM >To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org >Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior > >* Yottskry [08-07-13 15:12]: > [...] >Or that users such as yourself pay someone to develop and provide >software more to their *particular* liking and leave gimp and the gimp >mail lists! >After all, the money you pay for gimp definitely does not support your >wishes. so as a conclusion you mean that because it's free, it's allowed to be not functionnal. Am i wrong ? Then why does it exist ? just make gimp licensed, and you'll really see where are the customers and who is happy with the interface. Quite risky but will definitely answer the questions :) -- pitibonom (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] HATE the new save vs. export behavior
I add my vote on this one. XCF is a gimp only format, and unfortunately the world don't run on it. When really working on a pic, this one needs ( by nature ) to be exported and imported, and sometimes many times in a project. Of course when you draw in gimp, for gimp and nothing else ( no need to export/import anything as it's just a draw to insure you latest tablet still works fine ) the xcf format suits perfectly the needs ! It's quite natural to hope saving a pic in the format it has been loaded. Load a jpg ? ok, modify it and save it as jpg. Why is it natural ? just because jpg format ( though it degrades the image quality at each save, but this is another question ) is red by ALL tools, unlike xcf that cannot even be used as import in any tool. IMO developpers made a wrong choice in forcing user to naturally save in the native gimp format. It's not a shame at all to make wrong choices. I would become one to refuse admitting it. Am quite amazed by stupid answers saying:'ok you don't like this ? then rewrite it". Just transpose this kind of answer to for example the use of a car and you'll imagine it's market won't last long. As a former developper i know that i'ts 5 min to setup a tickbox in the pref window to allow the user choose between the new and old save system. Also it might be longer to reintegrate the old code for the old system, and at last it might take several months for testing the up and downs of such a change. Anyway, i think it's the wise choice. For the reason of the lack of this, the 2.8 don't suit my needs for my today's workflow and am still using the good ol' 2.6 ( wich sometimes crashes on my windows, but it's my very own choice ) At last but not least i just loaded the portable version of the 2.8.6 and noticed that finally the display bug under windows seems to have been solved. So congrats to the dev team for debugging this version i will still not use :-) In france when someone preaches in the desert, we use to say 'he pees in a violin' :D i'm almost sure that it's what am doing here in giving my opinion on this formely awesome tool. Mebe it will change things, or mebe not, but at least i had tried. regards. EDIT: amazing the captcha of this posting window is 'dictatorship' :D a subtle message ? ;-) -- pitibonom (via www.gimpusers.com/forums) ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP bug
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Jeffrey K wrote: > Sorry to be bugging you with this! I was unable to figure out bugzilla > (>v_v<)... > > I believe I found a bug in GIMP: > > When using the text function, the highlight, bold, and underline commands > won't work. > And when I use the larger editor for text, I am unable to increase size, > make italics, bold, underline etc. > > I love GIMP! Just hoping someone could bring that issue to attention and > maybe patch it. Thanks! , Hi Jeffrey It would help a lot if you clarified a few things: 1. Version of GIMP 2. Windows? Mac? Linux? 3. Do you select text before changing its formatting? Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
[Gimp-user] GIMP bug
Sorry to be bugging you with this! I was unable to figure out bugzilla (>v_v<)... I believe I found a bug in GIMP: When using the text function, the highlight, bold, and underline commands won't work. And when I use the larger editor for text, I am unable to increase size, make italics, bold, underline etc. I love GIMP! Just hoping someone could bring that issue to attention and maybe patch it. Thanks! -GIMP user, Jeff ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
Re: [Gimp-user] suggestion for Gimp
On 08.08.2013 at 10:00 P.M., Jay Smith wrote: This is open-source software. You are welcome to become a developer, fork the project, and do all this yourself or you can build a team to do it. Or you can hire people to do it for you. But asking the developers -- all volunteers -- to increase their workload (the divergence would keep widening over time) is not how things work in open-source software as I understand it. +1. You hit the nail right on the head - we're mostly volunteers, doing it in our limited spare time. And the one who is working by profession on GIMP has AFAIK been overloaded for years. However, I know better than to waste more energy on the subject. +1 Let's not forget: GIMP has a plug-in architecture. This means you can remove and add plug-ins to make GIMP fit your needs and personal preferences. The plug-in registry* has a bunch of plug-ins and there are projects like FX-Foundry* or G'Mic*. And in the whole, long discussion on the Save./.Export-behaviour some plug-ins were mentioned to solve this problem for the users who don't like or can't stay with the new behaviour. From this point of view I don't think we need many separate versions. Kind regards, Sven *plug-in registry: http://registry.gimp.org/ *FX-Foundry: http://gimpfx-foundry.sourceforge.net/ *G'Mic: http://gmic.sourceforge.net/gimp.shtml ___ gimp-user-list mailing list List address:gimp-user-list@gnome.org List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
