On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 00:34 +0000, minhsien0330 wrote:

Dear developers:
Can we have a new option "Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited" ?

It would defeat the purpose of moving Save to Export - that of avoiding accidental work loss.

I would like to be told exactly *what* I'm about to lose, since even xcf is lossy (does not store undo history or active fonts, for example).

The compromise is to be told whether I've exported each image when I to go to close it, and in what format and with what filename. I've been told 2.8.1 does this.

Liam

close them without clicking the confirming dialog, it will save so much

working time. Thank you~

Use keyboard shortcuts for closing xcf's - Ctrl+W (or click to close) then Alt+W. Really takes just fraction of a second. It has always eluded me trying to understand why so many users didn't take Save/Export changes well.
If they simply hate a new dialogue popping up their way, they must have forgotten how irritating it was
in 2.4-2.6 to deal with modal dialogues asking you if you want to flatten image (with more than 1 layer)
when saving it in file formats other than xcf. How about error message dialogues popping up in bunches, and then you had to close them one by one?
Oh, boy...Thank gods, no, thank developers, we don't have to deal with all that now!

-----
Nik O.
Никита Омуль
--
View this message in context: http://gimp.1065349.n5.nabble.com/Request-Do-not-confirm-closing-if-unsaved-image-was-exported-overwrited-tp35572p35578.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:28:55 -0700 From: nik-omul@yandex.ru
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited ?

It has always eluded me trying to understand why so many users didn't take Save/Export changes well.

Like it or not, what file formats are available under the "Save" dialog says a lot about your program's core purpose. Somebody said "GIMP is no longer an 'image' editor, it's now an 'xcf' editor" - I have to agree.

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

Like it or not, what file formats are available under the "Save" dialog says

a lot about your program's core >purpose. Somebody said "GIMP is no longer an 'image' editor, it's now an 'xcf' editor" - I have to agree.

GIMP does not stand out as the only graphic editor that does it. Krita, Blender, Synfig, Inkscape, MyPaint - just to name a few OpenSource editors, all have the concept of saving in their unique native formats as an
opposite to exporting. Not even all of them have the ability to export anything else to begin with.
All the plugins handling non-native file formats are not built in GIMP library core, that's why they are called plugins. Fact is, GIMP imports alien to its core files, and following the logic, it should export them as well. That's exactly what it does. I see neither controversy nor inconsistency in that.

-----
Nik O.
Никита Омуль
--
View this message in context: http://gimp.1065349.n5.nabble.com/Request-Do-not-confirm-closing-if-unsaved-image-was-exported-overwrited-tp35572p35587.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On 09/14/2012 05:25 PM, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:28:55 -0700

> From: nik-omul@yandex.ru
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited ?
>
> It has always eluded me trying to understand why so many users didn't take
> Save/Export changes well.

Like it or not, what file formats are available under the "Save" dialog says a lot about your program's core purpose. Somebody said "GIMP is no longer an 'image' editor, it's now an 'xcf' editor" - I have to agree.

Hi
This plug-in save-export-clean.py works well https://github.com/akkana/gimp-plugins/

"A plug-in for those who still don't like the new Save/Export" https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list/2012-August/msg00072.html

Tell me if you got problem

Greetings

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Nik Omul wrote:

GIMP does not stand out as the only graphic editor that does it. Krita, Blender, Synfig, Inkscape, MyPaint -

Nope. Krita and MyPaint don't do that.

MyPaint has a Preferences setting that configures default file format for saving. Krita just saves to whatever you choose and doesn't warn about possible loss of data. And if you talk to Krita developers, they'll tell you it's their design choice.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

GIMP does not stand out as the only graphic editor that does it. Krita, Blender, Synfig, Inkscape, MyPaint -

Nope. Krita and MyPaint don't do that.

MyPaint has a Preferences setting that configures default file format for saving. Krita just saves to whatever you choose and doesn't warn about possible loss of data. And if you talk to Krita developers, they'll tell you it's their design choice.

It's true. Correction accepted, although I was speaking conceptually and Krita
does offer its own file extension as a fisrt choice default, configurability aside.
And if or when the acceptance and recognition of those applications across the
globe hits certain level, there is no guarantee they won't change that. The likelyhood of that happening in near future is minute but things change, so does ego (in a good sense) of their creators. GIMP continues to get this recognition now on both pro and amatuer levels. The rest may just follow the case.

-----
Nik O.
Никита Омуль
--
View this message in context: http://gimp.1065349.n5.nabble.com/Request-Do-not-confirm-closing-if-unsaved-image-was-exported-overwrited-tp35572p35590.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Liam R E Quin writes:

On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 00:34 +0000, minhsien0330 wrote:

Dear developers:
Can we have a new option "Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited" ?

It would defeat the purpose of moving Save to Export - that of avoiding accidental work loss.

Accidental work loss is the main reason I dislike the new model. I don't much mind the Save vs. Export split, or remembering when I need to type Ctrl-E vs. Ctrl-S -- but it's frustrating that I no longer have any way to tell whether all my JPGs have been sav^H^H^Hexported and therefore it's safe to quit GIMP. With the 2.8 model I actually have more risk of work loss, not less.

When I wrote Save/export clean, I wrote it for other people and didn't really plan to use it myself -- I wanted to adapt to the new model -- but I find I do use it, for that reason.

I would like to be told exactly *what* I'm about to lose, since even xcf is lossy (does not store undo history or active fonts, for example).

That would solve the problem for me. I wouldn't mind so much getting the warning dialog when I quit if it gave me some way to tell whether all the JPGs have been safely exported. Especially if it grouped the neither-saved-nor-exported images first, so I could notice them without scrolling through every image touched during the session.

The compromise is to be told whether I've exported each image when I to go to close it, and in what format and with what filename. I've been told 2.8.1 does this.

Maybe 2.8.3? 2.8.2 doesn't do that, just: "There is one image with unsaved changes: [Untitled]-1". No export or filename info, not even the original filename.

...Akkana

Already fulfilled in 2.8.2
1.[filename] (imported) -1.0 for imported image 2.*[filename] (imported) -1.0 for any changes made to the original 3. filename.xcf - 1.0
4.*filename.xcf -1.0 for any changes made to the original xcf 5.[Untitled] - 1.0 for newly created image

New features in 2.8.4? 1.[Untitled] (exp'd as filename.ext) or just "exported" if exp'd multiple times with different
filenames/extensions
2.[filename] (imp'd-exp'd as filename.ext) if imported and saved with different file extension.
3. *[filename] (imp'd-exp'd as filename.ext) - for changes 4.[filename] (overwritten) - within image's current session only and so on...

Just thinking out loud...so, please, don't tear me apart :)

----- Nik O.
Никита Омуль
--
View this message in context: http://gimp.1065349.n5.nabble.com/Request-Do-not-confirm-closing-if-unsaved-image-was-exported-overwrited-tp35572p35592.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On 09/14/2012 08:37 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Nik Omul wrote:

GIMP does not stand out as the only graphic editor that does it. Krita, Blender, Synfig, Inkscape, MyPaint -

Nope. Krita and MyPaint don't do that.

MyPaint has a Preferences setting that configures default file format for saving. Krita just saves to whatever you choose and doesn't warn about possible loss of data.

About Krita
I dont see any problem about this behaviour. This is a lot better because it makes you free, it gives you more options. Example 1
You decide to create a picture with layers. You create necessarily an .xcf file and you save it as file.xcf. Better, its my working method: you can save it as file-1.xcf, then file-2.xcf, then file-3.xcf, etc... You can go back when you want. Example 2
You decide to edit a .png, improve color, luminosity, etc... No need layers. You open it, make the changes et you save it as .png

And if you talk to Krita developers, they'll tell you it's their design choice.

I noticed that KDE developers are pragmatic.They try to free users, too. Greetings

On 09/15/2012 12:56 AM, Akkana Peck wrote:

Accidental work loss is the main reason I dislike the new model. I don't much mind the Save vs. Export split, or remembering when I need to type Ctrl-E vs. Ctrl-S -- but it's frustrating that I no longer have any way to tell whether all my JPGs have been sav^H^H^Hexported and therefore it's safe to quit GIMP. With the 2.8 model I actually have more risk of work loss, not less.

If you forgot to export as JPG but saved the image as XCF, then you can reopen Gimp and produce your JPG. Trouble, yes, data loss, no. If you "save" to JPG but forget to save as XCF, less trouble in some cases, but data loss in others.

Ofnuts schreef op za 15-09-2012 om 12:11 [+0200]:

On 09/15/2012 12:56 AM, Akkana Peck wrote:

Accidental work loss is the main reason I dislike the new model. I don't much mind the Save vs. Export split, or remembering when I need to type Ctrl-E vs. Ctrl-S -- but it's frustrating that I no longer have any way to tell whether all my JPGs have been sav^H^H^Hexported and therefore it's safe to quit GIMP. With the 2.8 model I actually have more risk of work loss, not less.

If you forgot to export as JPG but saved the image as XCF, then you can reopen Gimp and produce your JPG. Trouble, yes, data loss, no. If you "save" to JPG but forget to save as XCF, less trouble in some cases, but data loss in others.

I save my edited photos in xcf (or xcf.bz2) and I have a script that converts them automatically to all formats I often use (jpegs in some sizes (converting to sRGB on the fly), tiff in the original size). It just scans all xcf files and checks if all converted files exist and are newer than the xcf file. To me, it's the most user-friedly approach.

Currently, the script is quite a mess tuned to my preferences, but it's maybe a good idea to make it somewhat more generic and add a configuration wizard to it. If I have some time and manage to write something useful, I'll post a link...

Best regards,

Maarten

On 09/15/2012 12:56 AM, Akkana Peck wrote:

Accidental work loss is the main reason I dislike the new model. I don't much mind the Save vs. Export split, or remembering when I need to type Ctrl-E vs. Ctrl-S -- but it's frustrating that I no longer have any way to tell whether all my JPGs have been sav^H^H^Hexported and therefore it's safe to quit GIMP. With the 2.8 model I actually have more risk of work loss, not less.

I save my edited photos in xcf (or xcf.bz2) and I have a script that converts them automatically to all formats I often use (jpegs in some sizes (converting to sRGB on the fly), tiff in the original size). It just scans all xcf files and checks if all converted files exist and are newer than the xcf file. To me, it's the most user-friedly approach.

Anna, Maarten! Hi!

Accidental loss of unsaved work more than a few times (by different reason, tho)
forced me to use this python plugin http://registry.gimp.org/node/26115

You might want to check it out. It saves as xcf (bz2, gz) all open, all changed images
and you can set back-up time interval. Works like a charm. Could be an integral part of standard GIMP package (wishful thinking :)
Cheers.

-----
Nik O.
Никита Омуль
--
View this message in context: http://gimp.1065349.n5.nabble.com/Request-Do-not-confirm-closing-if-unsaved-image-was-exported-overwrited-tp35572p35596.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

* Akkana

Sorry for misspelling your name, Akkana.

----- Nik O.
Никита Омуль
--
View this message in context: http://gimp.1065349.n5.nabble.com/Request-Do-not-confirm-closing-if-unsaved-image-was-exported-overwrited-tp35572p35597.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:24:54 -0700 From: nik-omul@yandex.ru
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited ?

All the plugins handling non-native file formats are not built in GIMP library core, that's why they are called plugins. Fact is, GIMP imports alien to its core files, and following the logic, it should export them as well.

Core vs. plugin is a completely invisible distinction to the end user, IMHO therefore it should never be raised as an argument in discussion.

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

Ofnuts writes:

If you forgot to export as JPG but saved the image as XCF, then you can reopen Gimp and produce your JPG. Trouble, yes, data loss, no.

Seriously? You save an XCF copy of every JPG you crop or rescale? For about 8x-20x (depending on size and compression) the disk space? I doubt many people would want to do that.

Though, curiously, even that doesn't get around the warning problem. I just tried this in 2.8.2, so I could compare disk usage:

1. Open origfilename.jpg 2. Crop and Scale to 640 x whatever pixels 3. Save as: filename.xcf
4. Save as or Save a Copy (tried it both ways): filename.xcf.gz 5. Export to (or ctrl-E, since sometimes it appears in the File menu and sometimes it doesn't, but ctrl-E always seems to work): filename.jpg 6. Quit

The image is marked clean after step 3, but after step 5, the image gets mysteriously marked dirty. So even though I've saved two xcf copies (they ranged from 7.5x to 20x the size of the JPG I was actually after), I still get an unsaved image warning.

Why does exporting an image mark it dirty even if it's been saved as XCF? I guess I'm more confused about this intended workflow than I realized.

...Akkana

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 11:00 -0700, Akkana Peck wrote:

Ofnuts writes:

If you forgot to export as JPG but saved the image as XCF, then you can reopen Gimp and produce your JPG. Trouble, yes, data loss, no.

Seriously? You save an XCF copy of every JPG you crop or rescale? For about 8x-20x (depending on size and compression) the disk space? I doubt many people would want to do that.

Though, curiously, even that doesn't get around the warning problem. I just tried this in 2.8.2, so I could compare disk usage:

1. Open origfilename.jpg 2. Crop and Scale to 640 x whatever pixels 3. Save as: filename.xcf
4. Save as or Save a Copy (tried it both ways): filename.xcf.gz 5. Export to (or ctrl-E, since sometimes it appears in the File menu and sometimes it doesn't, but ctrl-E always seems to work): filename.jpg 6. Quit

The image is marked clean after step 3, but after step 5, the image gets mysteriously marked dirty. So even though I've saved two xcf copies (they ranged from 7.5x to 20x the size of the JPG I was actually after), I still get an unsaved image warning.

Why does exporting an image mark it dirty even if it's been saved as XCF? I guess I'm more confused about this intended workflow than I realized.

Perhaps consider the possibility that something is broken?

--mitch

On 09/15/2012 08:00 PM, Akkana Peck wrote:

Ofnuts writes:

If you forgot to export as JPG but saved the image as XCF, then you can reopen Gimp and produce your JPG. Trouble, yes, data loss, no.

Seriously? You save an XCF copy of every JPG you crop or rescale? For about 8x-20x (depending on size and compression) the disk space? I doubt many people would want to do that.

When I only crop/rescale I have other tools, like Digikam.

This said, this isn't what I was saying. What I said that saving as XCF "by accident" may make you lose some time, but will never make you lose data, because you can always save the JPG again from the XCF.

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 11:00 -0700, Akkana Peck wrote:

Why does exporting an image mark it dirty even if it's been saved as XCF?

Michael Natterer writes:

Perhaps consider the possibility that something is broken?

After some experimentation and suggestions from Mitch, it turned out that it's because I had Preview on in my saved JPEG options. That causes a parasite to be attached to the image, as well as various other changes, when exporting to JPEG ... which marks the image dirty.

Mitch said the only solution, for now, is to disable JPEG Preview, because it's implemented as an "utter hack". Which I'll do, since the preview has several other problems too.

...Akkana

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 23:12 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:

[...] saving as XCF
"by accident" may make you lose some time, but will never make you lose data, because you can always save the JPG again from the XCF.

This isn't always true.

For example, after working on a photograph I scale it down e.g. to 600 pixels across, and export a jpeg. If at that point I save the xcf file, I will lose data, because xcf does not store the undo history.

Yes, I could use ImageMagick to scale the image, but (1) I do want to see the jpeg preview, as it often needs some extra work in curves or sharpen, and (2) I'm already in gimp :)

Liam

Is it possible to create a new layer group from a selection of layers ?

I know that it's impossible to select more than one layer at the time but since the introduction of the "layer group" concept ...

-- La Photo Du Jour
http://gb-photodujour.com
Sur internet depuis juin 1998

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Gerald wrote:

Is it possible to create a new layer group from a selection of layers ?

I know that it's impossible to select more than one layer at the time but since the introduction of the "layer group" concept ...

I think you answered your own question :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Yes but since the notion of "layer group" we should be able to select multiple layers to form a new group at least on a wish list !

Le 2012-09-15 20:54, Alexandre Prokoudine a crit :

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Gerald wrote:

Is it possible to create a new layer group from a selection of layers ?

I know that it's impossible to select more than one layer at the time but since the introduction of the "layer group" concept ...

I think you answered your own question :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

--
La Photo Du Jour
http://gb-photodujour.com
Sur internet depuis juin 1998

_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 5:14 AM, Gerald wrote:

Yes but since the notion of "layer group" we should be able to select multiple layers to form a new group at least on a wish list !

It _is_ in the wish list and will be done eventually :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Akkana Peck (akkana@shallowsky.com) wrote:

5. Export to (or ctrl-E, since sometimes it appears in the File menu and sometimes it doesn't, but ctrl-E always seems to work): filename.jpg 6. Quit

The image is marked clean after step 3, but after step 5, the image gets mysteriously marked dirty. So even though I've saved two xcf

This is not intentional. You probably had preview enabled and the jpeg plugin adds a preview layer which it later removes.

This of course changes the image: It inserts and removes stuff in the image.

This obviously is undesired behaviour regarding the "clean" flag. Maybe changing the jpeg plugin to use the undo system would help here. Not sure.

Bye,
Simon

On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 20:47:14 -0400 Gerald wrote:

Is it possible to create a new layer group from a selection of layers ?

I know that it's impossible to select more than one layer at the time but since the introduction of the "layer group" concept ...

-- La Photo Du Jour
http://gb-photodujour.com
Sur internet depuis juin 1998
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Hi Gerald,
PLEASE, do not hijack an existing thread. That is when you take an existing message and just change the subject instead of starting a new message.

If you notice, your message is shown in the original thread. This is due to the way messages are threaded, by thread number, not subject. When you just change the subject and send it, the thread number has not changed.

You will get better results if you start with a fresh message and give it a descriptive title. Some folks (me included) tend to close threads they aren't interested in and hence won't see your message.

Tom

On 09/16/2012 02:23 AM, Liam R E Quin wrote:

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 23:12 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:

[...] saving as XCF
"by accident" may make you lose some time, but will never make you lose data, because you can always save the JPG again from the XCF.

This isn't always true.

For example, after working on a photograph I scale it down e.g. to 600 pixels across, and export a jpeg. If at that point I save the xcf file, I will lose data, because xcf does not store the undo history.

You can also delete layers and save as XCF, and complain Gimp deleted your layers...

From: liam@holoweb.net
To: ofnuts@laposte.net
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 20:23:36 -0400 CC: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited ?

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 23:12 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:

[...] saving as XCF
"by accident" may make you lose some time, but will never make you lose data, because you can always save the JPG again from the XCF.

This isn't always true.

For example, after working on a photograph I scale it down e.g. to 600 pixels across, and export a jpeg. If at that point I save the xcf file, I will lose data, because xcf does not store the undo history.

Yes, I could use ImageMagick to scale the image, but (1) I do want to see the jpeg preview, as it often needs some extra work in curves or sharpen, and (2) I'm already in gimp :)

Liam

-- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

That is unfortunately true, GIMP has no ability to automatically scale-down the image to a different size as part of the export process. When you hit Save GIMP records everything necessary to recreate the image as it was when you hit Save, whether it is the preferred way of storing your overall project file or not. The XCF is not a full version repository logging everything that happened to the image since its creation - I imagine that should be the role of an XCF subformat so that the user has per-file control over whether or not they need that extra information taking up extra hard drive space.

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 20:47:14 -0400 From: gerald@gb-photodujour.com
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: [Gimp-user] Layer group

Is it possible to create a new layer group from a selection of layers ?

I know that it's impossible to select more than one layer at the time but since the introduction of the "layer group" concept ...

-- La Photo Du Jour
http://gb-photodujour.com
Sur internet depuis juin 1998
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Related to this, I've been thinking about writing a script-fu for a slightly more advanced version of the "New layer" command (if one doesn't exist already). Something that gives you control over:

- Size (image/current layer/custom) - Initial contents (FG/BG color, B/W, transparent) - Stack placement (above/below current, or create group with current)

As for the ability to select multiple layers at a time: This would definitely make creating layer groups easier on a pre-existing image. And for draw purposes, tools could probably just act on the topmost (non-locked) layer in the selection....

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

This sounds to me like a bug - possibly a specification error?

Certainly adds some possibly useful context to the longlasting (and unfortunately overly acrimonious) dispute about the save-export behavior in 2.8.

In my experience, it is extremely difficult to apprehend all the varieties of ways people like to use complex tools, especially in a world environment enamored with the famous Steve Jobs aphorism - "things should 'just work'" - and adapting - even when necessary - is uncomfortable, and often painful.

-- Burnie

On 09/16/2012 08:10 AM, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

From: liam@holoweb.net
To: ofnuts@laposte.net
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 20:23:36 -0400 CC: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image

was exported/overwrited ?

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 23:12 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:

[...] saving as XCF
"by accident" may make you lose some time, but will never make you lose data, because you can always save the JPG again from the XCF.

This isn't always true.

For example, after working on a photograph I scale it down e.g. to 600 pixels across, and export a jpeg. If at that point I save the xcf file, I will lose data, because xcf does not store the undo history.

Yes, I could use ImageMagick to scale the image, but (1) I do want to see the jpeg preview, as it often needs some extra work in curves or sharpen, and (2) I'm already in gimp :)

Liam

-- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

That is unfortunately true, GIMP has no ability to automatically scale-down the image to a different size as part of the export process. When you hit Save GIMP records everything necessary to recreate the image *as it was when you hit Save*, whether it is the preferred way of storing your overall project file or not. The XCF is not a full version repository logging everything that happened to the image since its creation - I imagine that should be the role of an XCF subformat so that the user has per-file control over whether or not they need that extra information taking up extra hard drive space.

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

No. GIGO applies here - GIMP assumes that the state of the image when you hit Save is exactly what you want to be saved to disk, so that's precisely what it does. In cases where it's not (such as with resizing the whole image) GIMP has no way to tell know better.

However, a resize-during-export could make an interesting feature request....

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 08:58:20 -0700 From: west@ieee.org
To: gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image was exported/overwrited ?

This sounds to me like a bug - possibly a specification error?

Certainly adds some possibly useful context to the longlasting (and unfortunately overly acrimonious) dispute about the save-export behavior in 2.8.

In my experience, it is extremely difficult to apprehend all the varieties of ways people like to use complex tools, especially in a world environment enamored with the famous Steve Jobs aphorism - "things should 'just work'" - and adapting - even when necessary - is uncomfortable, and often painful.

-- Burnie

On 09/16/2012 08:10 AM, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

From: liam@holoweb.net
To: ofnuts@laposte.net
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2012 20:23:36 -0400 CC: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] [Request] Do not confirm closing if unsaved image

was exported/overwrited ?

On Sat, 2012-09-15 at 23:12 +0200, Ofnuts wrote:

[...] saving as XCF
"by accident" may make you lose some time, but will never make you lose data, because you can always save the JPG again from the XCF.

This isn't always true.

For example, after working on a photograph I scale it down e.g. to 600 pixels across, and export a jpeg. If at that point I save the xcf file, I will lose data, because xcf does not store the undo history.

Yes, I could use ImageMagick to scale the image, but (1) I do want to see the jpeg preview, as it often needs some extra work in curves or sharpen, and (2) I'm already in gimp :)

Liam

-- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

That is unfortunately true, GIMP has no ability to automatically scale-down the image to a different size as part of the export process. When you hit Save GIMP records everything necessary to recreate the image *as it was when you hit Save*, whether it is the preferred way of storing your overall project file or not. The XCF is not a full version repository logging everything that happened to the image since its creation - I imagine that should be the role of an XCF subformat so that the user has per-file control over whether or not they need that extra information taking up extra hard drive space.

-- Stratadrake strata_ranger@hotmail.com
--------------------
Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth.

_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

_______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

No. GIGO applies here - GIMP assumes that the state of the image when you hit Save is exactly what you want to be saved to disk, so that's precisely what it does. In cases where it's not (such as with resizing the whole image) GIMP has no way to tell know better.

However, a resize-during-export could make an interesting feature request....

In my experience, exporting with existing samplers needs to be a user-controlled action. It really depends on the kind of image you are resizing.

For screenshots, automatic resizing simply produces horribly looking pictures. One of the reasons I run GIMP 2.9 for Git master is because I can access LoHalo sampler which works far better for resizing down than anything else in GIMP 2.8. And even then I need to add a bit of unsharp masking, depending on particular case.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Am 18.09.2012 07:05, schrieb Alexandre Prokoudine:

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

No. GIGO applies here - GIMP assumes that the state of the image when you hit Save is exactly what you want to be saved to disk, so that's precisely what it does. In cases where it's not (such as with resizing the whole image) GIMP has no way to tell know better.

However, a resize-during-export could make an interesting feature request....

In my experience, exporting with existing samplers needs to be a user-controlled action. It really depends on the kind of image you are resizing.

For screenshots, automatic resizing simply produces horribly looking pictures. One of the reasons I run GIMP 2.9 for Git master is because I can access LoHalo sampler which works far better for resizing down than anything else in GIMP 2.8. And even then I need to add a bit of unsharp masking, depending on particular case.

i think your example gives a compelling argument to enhance the export functionality a lot further. Not just auto-resize, but instead a complete GEGL side-chain for export!

The promise of going non-destructive is that you will be able to correct the misspelling of your customer's name which you missed 50 steps ago. You should not have to manually repeat all those carefully finetuned resample & sharpen steps just in order to export the corrected composition. The promise should not end when it comes to exporting.

While GIMP can be understood as an XCF editor, XCF is almost never the deliverable. In my understanding the product vision identifies exporting as a primary necessity.

The GEGL side-chain concept may work also on the import side:

bla.siff -> [OP1]-[OP2]-[OP3] -> composition -> [^OP3]-[^OP2]-[^OP1] -> bla_worked.siff

The necessary operations to convert a foreign file to a GIMP composition can be expressed as a small GEGL chain/tree. This import chain can be mirrored by a complementary export chain which contains the necessary operations to re-create the imported file. Or a least-surprise approximation of that file.

The import and export trees can be saved in the XCF, so that all the steps can be repeated and adjusted as needed. Also no more worries about whether to save the composition before resizing or after. It can be saved anytime, as the resize operation is only part of the export side-chain.

UI?

For standard "artistic" usage, the classic pop-up dialog with checkboxes serves the common cases. Under the hood, a GEGL chain performes the flattening and compression etc. This chain is invisibly controlled by such exports dialogs as they are in place right now.

For advanced "scientific" usage, a boxes-and-hoses GEGL side-tree can be tweaked to create just about any nasty structure for a foreign file that anyone may care to create *).

Possibly, even the projection concept (as envisioned for CMYK) may be hijacked to carry the GEGL side chain as a kind of "export projection".

best regards, yahvuu

*) for example, a SIFF file containing both layers with alpha and layers without without alpha. Or mixed 1bit/24bit layers with 8bit alpha. Whatever SIFF supports. (The names have been changed to protect the guilty).

Richard Gitschlag writes:

However, a resize-during-export could make an interesting feature request....

I wrote a simple version of that recently: http://shallowsky.com/blog/gimp/gimp-export-scaled.html

...Akkana