Hi,

It seems that your friend has tried an older version. In newer version (0.8.1) there were some changes which affect plug-ins usability. It would be very nice to hear detailed comments about it from someone who would use save-for-web often. The plug-in is still missing some options, but they'll be added as soon as it is considered usable in general.

Thanks

On 3/19/07, Aurimas Juška wrote:

It would be very nice to hear detailed comments about it from someone who would use save-for-web often.

Some people I know prefer to have EXIF stripped from final JPEG. This could be an option.

Alexandre

On Monday 19 March 2007 16:16:44 Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

Some people I know prefer to have EXIF stripped from final JPEG. This could be an option.

Recently one of our users complained that the Gimped photos of him are bigger than the ones processed with a Windows software (I don't remember its name and it doesn't matter though)...

After some tryouts we saw that, that software doesn't save exif so it decreases the file size with ~3-4kb.

User was trying to save photos with 5kb. maximum file size for a web application so 3-4Kb. was a big problem :)

So this feature can be useful but I was thinking this case was so marginal to make a feature request :)

On 3/16/07, Morgan Christiansson wrote:

Hi, i have a friend who's just migrating off windows and is currently running Ubuntu which he's generally happy with.

He complained about "save for web" functionality missing from the stock GIMP and had some good points on why it's needed, i found the save-for-web plugin through Linux for Designers blog ( http://my.opera.com/area42/blog/ ).

I personally don't see much use for a "save for web" plugin. Any functionality that it would have should already exist in other save dialogs, or be added if they are currently unimplemented. A save meta-dialog that can compare multiple formats (gif vs jpeg vs png) is a plausible addition, but theres no reason to restrict it to web-friendly options, or to duplicate functionality that already exists in the format-specific plugins.

lo

> I'm currently trying to get him involved in various GNOME/FLOSS things

cool ;)

> Side by side comparison of original image vs. optimized version.

because he is comparing to photoshop which allows to have 4 previews for the same image. That is nice of course but is that so useful that gimp has to clone Photoshop ?

> using Save for web for other media than the web > is nice too

an example should be nice; Traditionnally we have two kinds of output : screen/display (px) or paper (mm, pt or picas). For paper print i would NEVER use save for web.

> Cropping; Works very nicely. the cropped out area is a little too > dark for my taste -- perhaps this can be changed in the Gimp settings

I don"t think it can be set. And anyway, i would refer the the "on my taste" just to say that if everything was given a preference this could simply be unusable.

> GIF; same as the Image > Mode > Indexed... dialogue features except > for the Custom pallet option which Save for web does not have

yep i agree that this can be a trouble

> PNG-8; Same as GIF, but with a compression option (why?)

because png is also based on that compression

> Compression is only offered in 10 levels

as far as i know it has always been like that in gimp. why would you/he expect having more ?

I don't understand how all this can be a problem because, there is no qualitéy problem. If i'd heard that gimp's jpeg compression produces worst results than Photoshop (which is someway true) or that photoshop's pngs were better optimized, may be i would have understand. I only see here good feedback of someone who tested but don't really want to do efforts. But may be i'm the wrong way.

I personnaly think this save_for_web plugin is one of the best thing that happened to gimp the last 3 months. I would just personnally add a dependency check to a png optimizer, but this is only my wish, i don't knwo how it is usefull for other user.

If only i was involved in coding c...

pygmee

Hello , I am the person who wrote the forum posts about "Save for web" like features which my friend earlier forwarded to this list.

First a crash report. The save-for-web plug-in crashes when I try to preview an image as GIF which matches this criteria:
* At least one hidden layer
* At least one visible layer

Using: Save for Web 0.8.1 - Gimp 2.3.15 - Ubuntu 6.10 Edgy Eft The error console lists these errors on crash: * PDB calling error: Procedure 'temp-procedure-number-19' not found * Unable to run GimpPdbProgress callback.

As for features: * Zoom: Higher zoom than 800% would be good for a better feeling for each pixel (which is nice when deciding the amount of colours in an indexed mode format, or inspecting compression artifacts.) * Cropping: The crop panel collapses when: 1. Changing the crop dimensions back to the previewed images size. 2. Using the re-size tool. Very confusing and irritating.
* Previewing: When rendering a new preview, the preview area becomes black if the image has its original size and shows the original image if it has been re-sized. It would be very good if the previous preview could be kept until the new preview is ready and then the two be changed gaplessly as this would give you great information about how the optimised version has changed with the new preview.

Answers to Cedric Gemy's questions:

Side by side comparison of original image vs. optimized version.

because he is comparing to photoshop which allows to have 4 previews for the same image. That is nice of course but is that so useful that gimp has to clone Photoshop ?

I use it almost all the time when I save as JPEG or GIF. Not having to change the compression level to see how much the final image changes is a big bonus.

I don't understand why you say clone Photoshop. I can't think of any other way to do this than displaying previews next to each other or toggling between them with a widget.

using Save for web for other media than the web

> is nice too

an example should be nice; [...]

What I meant with this point was that the features that I requested is not only limited to images for the web, but are useful for almost all images meant to be displayed digitally (where file size or colour limits are important.)

An examples would be colour control for indexed mode images for older systems or pixel art.

Compression is only offered in 10 levels

as far as i know it has always been like that in gimp. why would you/he expect having more ?

I think I got the PNG compression confused with the JPEG. I have no arguments against 10 level choice of PNG compression now.

Thanks for the work!

- Kenneth