Hi,

Is there any way to set default JPG/PNG/whatever export settings? I am manipulating a lot of images right now and every JPG export involves changing the Quality, the Smoothing and the DCT method. Over and over and over. This happens with Export as well as using the Save for Web plugin (which really should have a way to specify defaults).

I imagine the work I am doing is a common task for Gimp users: opening multiple images cropping and changing those images and exporting each one as a unique version from the original.

Fortunately a lot of work like this can be dealt with by David's Batch Processor, but that doesn't address situations where you are altering each image file in unique ways.

As an example, Photoshop will remember whatever values you used the last time you exported/Saved for Web(Screen or whatever they call it now). It's fine if Gimp doesn't mimic Photoshop exactly, but it would be nice if the default could defined in the Preferences.

Another Idea! A feature that Photoshop doesn't have (outside of creating an Action): an "Export all open files" dialog could be pretty great. Allowing you to set – like DBP – the quality properties and destination directory all at once to export all open files. That would be AWESOME.

Thanks in advance for considering my question/workflow problem. I apologize if this question has been answered elsewhere but I couldn't find any satisfactory information with the usual methods.

Jason Simanek

Hi,

On 07/18/2013 01:05 AM, Guillermo Espertino (Gez) wrote:> Just save a new default with the settings you want and it will be used > next time you export.

Well, now I feel dumb. Thanks Gez!

This certainly fulfills my need, but I find it odd that the only way to alter that setting is from within the export/save dialog. But it's there at least.

For the record, Photoshop is FILLED with settings like these that are only accessible from places other than the Preferences panel.

I still think the "Save All Open Files" feature would be cool, though.

Thanks everyone for you patience (with idiots like me) and great software,

Jason Simanek

Hi,

On 07/18/2013 10:09 AM, Guillermo Espertino (Gez) wrote:

No need to feel dumb.

Thanks!

However, I think it's a smart place to put them: Usually you realize the default is not suitable for your needs while you're changing the output options over and over again (pretty much what happened to you), so being able to save a new default from those settings comes quite handy.

Yeah, the placement is fine, but it seems like Preferences contains reference to the preferred scaling algorithm. Why wouldn’t it include these properties also?

In my opinion, it's a reasonable compromise.

It's still frustrating that I have to click "Load Defaults" each time for every separate file I have open. Would be great if whatever I set as the "default" is just used as ... the default. As it is, it's not really a "default", but a "preset" or "profile". And in that case, it would be nice to be able to save multiple profiles.

One more thing that slows me down: The keyboard accessibility on these dialogs is not efficient. Why isn't the "OK" or "confirm" button set to be activated by hitting the Enter/Return button? And the tab-index-order can be annoyingly misguided at times. For example, the Scale dialog includes the proportion lock/unlock toggle in between the width and height values. For me it would make more sense for those to be AFTER all of the dimensional values in the tab order.

What's frustrating about these details is that they make using Gimp rely on constantly switching between the keyboard input and the mouse input.

Would it be helpful to go through these various dialogs and attempt to improve tab-index for them? Are any of the devs discussing this part of the UI?

Batch processing and export aren't kind the things I'd do with GIMP (basically because it lacks the tools for that at the moment, I'd use Phatch or even darktable for things like that) so, until GIMP has a user-friendly macro system, I don't think batch exporting is essential.

Right, but the workflow I am describing (it's a common one in my experience) involves doing similar but unique work on a series of image files. This kind of work cannot be completely batch scripted.

I mean, GIMP seems to be more oriented to complex manipulations rather than taking several images and apply repetitive tasks to them, and I don't think it's wise to work on several complex manipulations simultaneously without saving, to make "save/export all" necessary :-)

Right. The Gimp devs seem to be describing an intended workflow. It assumes extended work on solitary, complex xcf files that are repeatedly exported.

That sounds to me like illustration/complex photo manipulation and possibly web design – though I've completely switched to Inkscape for web design the last few years.

There's nothing wrong with this concept of primary workflow.

But what I am describing is also what I would guess is a big part of Gimp's usefulness for many people.

Thanks for the feedback and discussion!

Jason Simanek

On Fri 19 Jul 2013 09:25:27 PM CDT, Guillermo Espertino (Gez) wrote:

It's still frustrating that I have to click "Load Defaults" each time for every separate file I have open.

Check again, please. I don't think you have to press load defaults each time.
If it's not using the default you saved automatically there's something wrong.

For each separate file, on the first export I have to click "Load Defaults". After that, additional exports from the same file preserve the previously-used settings.

You shouldn't have to press load defaults. Defaults should be used automatically each time you export.

Since I am opening several different images, altering them and then exporting, I have to click "Load Defaults" for each one. The settings that initially show up seem to vary. Maybe they are somehow derived from qualities of the image file?

I'm sure that wrong tab indexes can be considered UI bugs, so I don't think anybody will be against discussing that and trying to improve it.

Okay. I will try to get organized and prepare what I think would be more useful tab indexes for these dialog windows.

How many of [the images] do you process at a time to make a batch save/export feature necessary?
And if the number is high enough, is it really wise to work with so many unsaved files at once?

Could you please describe your workflow and what kind of things you do with GIMP that would make batch save/export useful?

Mostly it's for some kind of web gallery or a series of photos for printed layouts (magazines).

Example #1 Website for a Diaper Cake maker (decorative "cakes" made out of baby diapers and other baby-stuff. Gifts for parents with newborn babies.)

The owner has photographed 30 product examples. Each image needs to be scaled and cropped to a certain format so they all match.

I don't really want to create a separate XCF file for all of these images and the custom scaling and cropping that I do is not of use for any other output. I just want to open them up, do whatever to each one and then export them all to the same location with the same settings. And move on.

Thanks again for the discussion!

Jason Simanek

On Sat 20 Jul 2013 12:35:15 PM CDT, Guillermo Espertino (Gez) wrote:

That made sense when save and export where the same thing. Actually, it was me who reported the issue of GIMP destroying jpegs inadvertently (default quality setting used to be 85 with the most aggressive chroma subsampling, so overwriting a high quality jpg with such crappy settings was a catastrophe).

Yes, I see the complication there. However, it does seem that the new file saving workflow addresses that concern. OVERWRITE should preserve the image file quality settings (I change Ctrl+S to Overwrite, personally). But I think EXPORT should be relative to the user's preferences, since you are usually exporting into a different quality level or different filetype.

In my oppinion (probably because my workflow was improved by the change instead of being impeded) you should try alternative tools for that work.
Darktable seems to be an excellent choice for batch processing and judging by the example you just mentioned, I think it will fit to your needs perfectly.

Darktable feels like it emphasizes a photographer’s workflow. "import" instead of "open", the default keyboard shortcuts are very strange (Ctrl+Z doesn't seem to do anything) and it isn't a "tool"-based workflow (there are no brushes, no text tool, no rubber stamp tool, nothing). For example, the way cropping works is very counter-intuitive for me and emphasizes quickly applying pre-set aspect ratios. At least that's my impression as a graphic design professional that's been using Photoshop since 1996.

I'm sure Darktable is great, but it doesn't have the features I need.

Thanks for the help. I'll keep getting things done in Gimp one way or another.

Jason Simanek

On 07/20/2013 02:21 PM, Akkana Peck wrote:

That is such a good idea that I wanted to dive in right away and write it.

That's fantastic!

I grabbed the code and tried it but it doesn't seem to do anything on Gimp 2.8.4. Then I looked at the code for a minute and realized that I do not understand how to write Python for Gimp.

Wish I could help!

Jason Simanek