not bad - a bit radical - need some improvements because not all users are new GIMP users - a lot of GIMP users use PHOTOSHOP for production or Corel Photopaint or other windows / mac based programs and this way you will broke the traditional SAVE / EXPORT pattern.

Corel Phtotopaint has also a pretty good model where SAVE = save this file as is. SAVE AS = save this file with other name (eventually other format ). EXPORT = export canvas objects with an other file format. EXPORT FOR WEB = canvas content will be saved as CSS, HTML Text and Tables, and some Image slices. EXPORT FOR OFFICE = export canvas objects in a convenient way for MS OFFICE to be used in that context. Everything is clear from first look ans is simple - instead of a single tool with many options - they present you very direct your options to save a file. When you chose one or other option you know what will follow.

To save multiple copies on the same time, from a single shoot (maybe with different extensions), working in a project based workflow, ..hmm, that can be good and pretty unique ..to update all copies when you make a modification according to rules that you established on first save / export operation, well this can be an idea to play around. This can save a lot of time when you work on a project presented in web as well as in catalogs and brochures - same thing can be saved as jpg for web, png / tiff for DTP on the same time.

I think your idea deserve a brainstorm session.

2009/10/5 photocomix@gmail.com :

A clear distinction between Save and Export was needed

But even if conceptually different in practice ,   both operation are always needed for the every edited image:
is needed to Save the original AND to export as jpg or png .

So why do not offer a chance to speed up the workflow, save time and patience
achieving both result simultaneusly ?

A image is worth 1.000 words ,to avoid misunderstunding i invite to give a look to this
mock up
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2653/3981269891_998c2f513b_o.jpg

As you may see the idea is not to replace the Export dialog, but  to offer a handy option from the Save dialog, to simultaneously export , with same name and in the same directory in other file formats

A possible objection is that "same name and some directory" is a severe limit but

1) For other cases there is well the proper Export Dialog

2) consider a  real case

 if in 1 day i edit 50 photos, i  need to go trought 150 Save and Export dialog (and as now to click away about 300 warning ) to save original,a looseness png or tiff copy, and a jpg of my work

Using that option at the end of the work, in case i wish original, png and jpg in different folder i may get the result in 1 minute:

Is trivial filter the folder content for file extension and batch move all xcf, png, and jpg in their own dedicated folder

Even Picasa, or xnview and irfanview may do in a heartbeat...so would be not even needed to type a couple of  commands  in a terminal

1 minute Vs 100 additional dialogs

PS

i will appreciate a reply to this somehow connected technical question http://www.gimpusers.com/forums/gimp-developer/12001-Gimp-file-save-interactive.html  :
In case the above proposal will be rejected, and anyway in time-while  i will really need a script doing something similar...script is ready but that problem spoils the result

-- photocomix@gmail.com (via www.gimpusers.com) _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

photocomix@gmail.com wrote:
::snip? SNIP!::

As you may see the idea is not to replace the Export dialog, but to offer a handy option from the Save dialog, to simultaneously export , with same name and in the same directory in other file formats

Wouldn't this be fairly straightforward to do as a plugin/python-fu/script-fu?

Adding code makes things slower. If this isn't something that would benefit the vast majority of GIMP users (and I'm not sure it would), it seems better to offer it as an option for those who want it, rather than to add extra code for the users who won't touch it.

--xsdg

Hi,

On 10/05/2009 02:10 AM, photocomix@gmail.com wrote:

But even if conceptually different in practice , both operation are always needed for the every edited image:
is needed to Save the original AND to export as jpg or png .

This assumption is wrong. Complex compositions will need to be refined for weeks. All work is done in XCF. Before final delivery there is only an occasional need to export to some other format.

/ Martin

On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 22:24 +0200, Martin Nordholts wrote:

Hi,

On 10/05/2009 02:10 AM, photocomix@gmail.com wrote:

But even if conceptually different in practice , both operation are always needed for the every edited image:
is needed to Save the original AND to export as jpg or png .

This assumption is wrong. Complex compositions will need to be refined for weeks. All work is done in XCF. Before final delivery there is only an occasional need to export to some other format.

Actually the two statements don't contradict each other -- it's fair to say that the most likely workflows are (1) load image (jpeg. png, tiff, cr2, etc) work on image
maybe save image in proprietary format temporarily, between sessions eventually, do at least one of
. save in archive format (tiff, png) . export to jpeg or gif or .mov or whatever . print

(2) create new image, and rest as above.

And in most cases you'll need to export the image at some point, for every image.

It's got a little harder to track what you've done, now, because you need to know if the export filenames are up to date as well as the xcf filenme, and right now you can't tell.

E.g. an "image file history" panel showing save status, or adding save & export events to the undo history (even though you can't undo them they are part of the history) might help.

Liam

photocomix wrote:

i knew that Peter Sikking (or somebody else from Gimp UI brainstorm staff)replied but the message get lost for technical problems (full storage
disk)

yes, I am (by default) the Gimp UI brainstorm staff, and I had about 3 threads going on here before the list collapsed.

I am very interested to know the content of that reply,i hope you may send
again now

here we go:

OK, I waited with replying because I wanted to think about this carefully.
that is because quite a few issues are combining here.

first two fundamental issues:

1) let's face it: this is a new feature request. it is not that we broke something in this 50 pictures a day (10 minutes each) workflow. actually, on balance things got a bit better for this with clear saving and exporting.
2) an even bigger picture: does GIMP has to solve this problem? since part of what you want is a no-brainer conversion from png to jpeg. sounds like a job for a batch tool. this way you would save your GIMP file, then ctrl-shift-E, return, return, and GIMP does remember if you wanted TIFF or png all the time. run the batch job at the end of the day.

so why not add it anyway, doesn't hurt no? yes it does:

- by associating 2 or more export files, "Export to foo.png" (ctrl-E) has to be redesigned and never be as good as now.

- you have coupled saving to exporting of multiple files, hard. in general these things do not happen at the same time, saving work is a different thing then delivering. write times go up by a factor of 1+N, where N is the number of export formats.

- so it is easy to set (well, you will have to 50 times a day) but how to stop it for a file? it was in the Save dialog, but to get there again? Save as?

- UI also needs to be not-error-inducing and give a clear model to users to how things work. this proposal here is one of several to get a liiiiitle bit of export back into the Save dialog. each of these creates _a_ way to export, that users may figure out as _the_ way to export, because they are migrating from 2.6 to 2.8. No, it does not help that we have clear Export on the File menu. we simply cannot let these models of export develop.

so that is why I am against this.

--ps

founder + principal interaction architect man + machine interface works

http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM, peter sikking wrote:

so that is why I am against this.

    --ps

Even that said, anyone is free to develop a save and export plugin and offer it up for public consumption. It may not make it into the core, but assuming it is worthwhile, it will find use.

-Rob A.

[Looks like every time I post, I kill the list. My apologies; reposting]

On 2009-10-05, photocomix@gmail.com wrote:

So why do not offer a chance to speed up the workflow, save time and patience
achieving both result simultaneusly ?

A image is worth 1.000 words ,to avoid misunderstunding i invite to give a look to this
mock up
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2653/3981269891_998c2f513b_o.jpg

Suppose you do this. You edit something, and press C-s. What would happen?

Ilya

An idea (especially for when GIMP moves to GEGL). Apologies if this has been suggested/shot down before.

I think that the following terminology would be fairly clear to users:

Save IMAGE (basically, export to a non-xcf format)

Save PROJECT (save the xcf/gegl tree)

Save WORKSPACE (save the current configuration of GIMP, not the xcf/gegl tree or the image: visible tools, visible non image windows etc)

IMHO, this 3-pronged "save" option makes it pretty clear what this is about.

I suggested earlier that "Save workspace" (like nip2) should be the non-export quick save, but eventually realized that a "workspace" suggests a set of easily accessible tools organized to fit a specific TYPE of project.

On the other hand, "Save project' suggests that all the components of the intended final image should be kept around.

"Save image" really suggests that what you are saving is the final product, in a common image format, that is, it corresponds to exporting.

Nicolas Robidoux
Universite Laurentienne