Just because a program does not perform the way you would like it to, doesn't make it an inferior program. GIMP is a very powerful Image Editing program that thousands of people use day to day. For every one that states in this forum that it is a regression there is probably as many that like the new behavior that don't post. As it has been said before if you don't like it, use something else, no body makes you use GIMP.

On 14/06/2013 17:03, Crew wrote:

In case you are not just phishing (which is unlikely, as there are several such emails posted recently:-)

Given the way Adobe are moving to a subscription model, there are going to be a lot of new users like myself seriously looking at The Gimp in future.
The recent addition of colour management finally moved The Gimp into the realms of being worthy of serious consideration, but trying to make it some sort of exclusive package that works with it's own file formats is just daft.
If you can drag and drop an image into the program it should by default save back to the same format. Everything other program works that way, changing that protocol is unintuitive and just daft.

If the discussion has had thousands of comments in the past it's pretty clear it's at least contentious.

Do the developers of The Gimp want it to be taken seriously ?, or will they be happy just making something non-standard that will make them look foolish. As a potential new user that's how it's looking to me.

You're wrong!

The problem is NOT a lack of conventional Save command, rather a lack of conventional Import command!

The program "opens" non-native files! That should not happen! It should import them so you are fully aware that you need to export to a non-native format.

Helping new users of KompoZer and The GIMP

Sorry, I was mistaking The Gimp for a sensible image editing program.

If this is the sort of advice given out to new users I can see why The Gimp is regarded so poorly by imaging professionals.

Paul Holman www.colourprofiles.com
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Andrew & Bridget wrote:

Just because a program does not perform the way you would like it to, doesn't make it an inferior program. GIMP is a very powerful Image Editing program that thousands of people use day to day. For every one that states in this forum that it is a regression there is probably as many that like the new behavior that don't post. As it has been said before if you don't like it, use something else, no body makes you use GIMP.

Actually, at this point GIMP branded handcuffs that would have "export" engraved all over them could generate quite a lot of income for the project.

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Crew wrote:

If the discussion has had thousands of comments in the past it's pretty clear it's at least contentious.

There's that old war trick: crawl towards the opposing army in the dark and make as much noise as possible like there's an army of you.

I'm sorry you had to crawl, but the noise isn't fooling me. A lot of people are happy with 2.8, the user base is growing. If you are not one of them, it's a pity, but stuff like that happens everywhere, all the time, to all sort of projects.

If this is the sort of advice given out to new users I can see why The Gimp is regarded so poorly by imaging professionals.

Oh, there are many reasons imaging professionals regard GIMP poorly. Would you like to discuss all of them? :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Andrew & Bridget
A remark such as "if you don't like it, don't use it" is rude and unhelpful, and such remarks
should never appear on this list. I've stayed out of the discussion of this regression -- I hate the
change to-- but I appeal for courtesy to those who care enough to try to communicate the
problems this is causing. And it is causing so many problems for me that I'm wondering if it's
going to be a game breaker. I work with agents for my art galleries. One of my agents wants
everything sent as jpeg so I send her what she wants. One wants .tif so I send her what she
wants. Juried exhibits ask for jpeg (I don't know why) but this change adds hours to a job
that should take me half an hour.
Helen

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Andrew & Bridget < andrew_bridget@btinternet.com> wrote:

Just because a program does not perform the way you would like it to, doesn't make it an inferior program. GIMP is a very powerful Image Editing program that thousands of people use day to day. For every one that states in this forum that it is a regression there is probably as many that like the new behavior that don't post. As it has been said before if you don't like it, use something else, no body makes you use GIMP.

On 14/06/2013 17:03, Crew wrote:

In case you are not just phishing (which is unlikely, as there are

several such emails posted recently:-)

Given the way Adobe are moving to a subscription model, there are going to be a lot of new users like myself seriously looking at The Gimp in future.
The recent addition of colour management finally moved The Gimp into the realms of being worthy of serious consideration, but trying to make it some sort of exclusive package that works with it's own file formats is just daft.
If you can drag and drop an image into the program it should by default save back to the same format. Everything other program works that way, changing that protocol is unintuitive and just daft.

If the discussion has had thousands of comments in the past it's pretty clear it's at least contentious.

Do the developers of The Gimp want it to be taken seriously ?, or will they be happy just making something non-standard that will make them look foolish. As a potential new user that's how it's looking to me.

You're wrong!

The problem is NOT a lack of conventional Save command, rather a lack of conventional Import command!

The program "opens" non-native files! That should not happen! It should import them so you are fully aware that you need to export to a non-native format.

Helping new users of KompoZer and The GIMP

Sorry, I was mistaking The Gimp for a sensible image editing program.

If this is the sort of advice given out to new users I can see why The Gimp is regarded so poorly by imaging professionals.

Paul Holman www.colourprofiles.com
______________________________**_________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-**list

______________________________**_________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/**mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-**list

--
Helen Etters
using Linux, suse12.3

Helen Etters
using Linux, suse12.3

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Helen wrote:

Andrew & Bridget
A remark such as "if you don't like it, don't use it" is rude and unhelpful, and such remarks
should never appear on this list. I've stayed out of the discussion of this regression -- I hate the
change to-- but I appeal for courtesy to those who care enough to try to communicate the
problems this is causing. And it is causing so many problems for me that I'm wondering if it's
going to be a game breaker. I work with agents for my art galleries. One of my agents wants
everything sent as jpeg so I send her what she wants. One wants .tif so I send her what she
wants. Juried exhibits ask for jpeg (I don't know why) but this change adds hours to a job
that should take me half an hour.

Helen,

That doesn't sound right.

What does workflow look like?

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

It would take too long a message to do justice to your question, but a quick version goes something like
My agent sends a jpg of the card she plans to mail out, asking me to edit. I edit, save to jpg becasue tha's what she wants, and it has now disappeared off my screen.
I open it again to make sure I am satisfied with it, mail it to her. She mails it back with the changes I've asked for, I review and either make changes or don't, and
start the circle again (export instead of save as, it disappears, I open it again for review, etc.)
Here is a sample of what I'm talking about, a postcard announcing an opening, although I don't know
whether the image will show up on the gimp list.

Also, check the website for Associated Artists of NC, for Muddy River Arts, for ... well, they all
ask for jpegs (again, I don't know why). I like to see, to take a final look, at what I send to my agents, to juried competitions, and to printers
and the owners of art galleries. This new requirement that I keep exporting and re-opening jpg files
is counterproductive, frustrating, and is an extreme increase in the time it takes me to do my work.

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine < alexandre.prokoudine@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Helen wrote:

Andrew & Bridget
A remark such as "if you don't like it, don't use it" is rude and unhelpful, and such remarks
should never appear on this list. I've stayed out of the discussion of this regression -- I hate the
change to-- but I appeal for courtesy to those who care enough to try to communicate the
problems this is causing. And it is causing so many problems for me that I'm wondering if it's
going to be a game breaker. I work with agents for my art galleries.

One

of my agents wants
everything sent as jpeg so I send her what she wants. One wants .tif

so I

send her what she
wants. Juried exhibits ask for jpeg (I don't know why) but this change adds hours to a job
that should take me half an hour.

Helen,

That doesn't sound right.

What does workflow look like?

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

Helen Etters
using Linux, suse12.3

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Helen wrote:

My agent sends a jpg of the card she plans to mail out, asking me to edit. I edit, save to jpg becasue tha's what she wants, and it has now disappeared off my screen.

Why did it disappear off your screen? Why do you reopen it?

This new requirement that I keep exporting and re-opening jpg files

Helen, there is no such requirement. You absolutely don't need to reopen anything.

When you export a file to JPEG from GIMP, you get the same dialog with a checkbox that lets you preview how quality setting affects the final image.

Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org

On 15.06.2013 04:34, Helen wrote:

I work with agents for my art galleries. One of my agents wants everything sent as jpeg so I send her what she wants. One wants .tif so I send her what she wants. Juried exhibits ask for jpeg (I don't know why)

So you need multiple exports from the same image.

Export makes this easy, and helps to ensure that you still got your original image with layers and paths (or whatever you have used) intact. That's not perfect yet - for example, you lose the undo history - but a first step in the direction of making XCF (or its successor) an even more integral part of the workflow.

One future addition could be the automatic export of several files from one image...

Regards,
Michael

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:30:43 +0200 From: schumaml@gmx.de
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?

. . . That's not perfect yet - for example, you lose the undo history . . .

How often is Undo history ACTUALLY needed by the user, beyond fixing a ten-seconds-ago mistake? I can't personally name a single application that stores undo history with the document's workfile; but if you can, let me know.

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

On 06/14/2013 08:14 PM, Helen wrote:

It would take too long a message to do justice to your question, but a quick version goes something like
My agent sends a jpg of the card she plans to mail out, asking me to edit. I edit, save to jpg becasue tha's what she wants, and it has now disappeared off my screen.

This is truly bizarre. I'm running GIMP 2.8.4 on Ubuntu 13.04 Linux (64-bit) and I just tried this and did not get the behavior you describe. Here is what happened for me:

1. I open a JPEG file in GIMP 2. I make an edit (like erasing part of it) 3. I right-click on the image and click "File", then "Export" and export to JPEG format
4. I set the JPEG save options and save the file 5. The original image is *still* displayed and I must manually close the window. When doing this, I'm prompted to save the file or not. After doing this (regardless of my saving or not), the image goes away and I'm left with the default image window with no image loaded

What exact steps do you follow to save the image to JPEG format after making your initial edits?

Peace...

Tom

/When we dance, you have a way with me,
Stay with me... Sway with me.../

Your steps are pretty much the same as mine. The misunderstanding Iguess is that, after I export, the .jpg file disappears. Yes, the original image is there, with all it's layers and that is good, but at this point, I am finished with the .xcf file and I want to see the jpg. But it is gone, so I have to re-open it. i may tweak it for the agent or gallery, but I can't save it and send it to them, because as soon as I re- opened it, it became .xcf again. so I have to export again, and, again, it disappears, so I hve to open the jpg again, and of course it reverts to ..xcf again ... it's not the exporting that is causing the trouble-- that's easy enough to do. it's the fact that after I export to jpg, the jpg disappears and I have to keep re-opening it. Not good. Yes, the original file is still there, but my agent does not want that one.

On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Tom Williams wrote:

On 06/14/2013 08:14 PM, Helen wrote:

It would take too long a message to do justice to your question, but a quick version goes something like
My agent sends a jpg of the card she plans to mail out, asking me to

edit.

I edit, save to jpg becasue tha's what she wants, and it has now disappeared off my screen.

This is truly bizarre. I'm running GIMP 2.8.4 on Ubuntu 13.04 Linux (64-bit) and I just tried this and did not get the behavior you describe. Here is what happened for me:

1. I open a JPEG file in GIMP 2. I make an edit (like erasing part of it) 3. I right-click on the image and click "File", then "Export" and export to JPEG format
4. I set the JPEG save options and save the file 5. The original image is *still* displayed and I must manually close the window. When doing this, I'm prompted to save the file or not. After doing this (regardless of my saving or not), the image goes away and I'm left with the default image window with no image loaded

What exact steps do you follow to save the image to JPEG format after making your initial edits?

Peace...

Tom

-- /When we dance, you have a way with me, Stay with me... Sway with me.../
_______________________________________________ gimp-user-list mailing list
gimp-user-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Helen Etters
using Linux, suse12.3

On 06/15/2013 12:42 PM, Helen wrote:

Your steps are pretty much the same as mine. The misunderstanding Iguess is that, after I export, the .jpg file disappears. Yes, the original image is there, with all it's layers and that is good, but at this point, I am finished with the .xcf file and I want to see the jpg. But it is gone, so I have to re-open it. i may tweak it for the agent or gallery, but I can't save it and send it to them, because as soon as I re- opened it, it became .xcf again. so I have to export again, and, again, it disappears, so I hve to open the jpg again, and of course it reverts to ..xcf again ... it's not the exporting that is causing the trouble-- that's easy enough to do. it's the fact that after I export to jpg, the jpg disappears and I have to keep re-opening it. Not good. Yes, the original file is still there, but my agent does not want that one.

Ok, I better understand what you're saying. I just went through the process again and I think the biggest "obstacle" here is your description of things. Here's what I mean: when I (or you) open the JPEG image, it appears in the GIMP image window as an image, either in indexed mode, grayscale mode, or RGB mode. It's not really a "JPEG" or "PNG" or anything, since those are image _file_ formats. When you make an edit on the image and you export it, the JPEG doesn't "disappear" and the edited image still shows in the image window. It's that you want to see the _exported_ JPEG file to confirm the export resulted in the JPEG file you wanted to create for the client.

When I export JPEG files from GIMP, I also view them to make sure they look good but I tend to view them outside of GIMP, since I have no need to re-open them to make changes. Why? Because the original image I edited is *still* loaded in the GIMP image window, waiting for me to either save it, as a XCF file, or to make more changes to it.

I think you're thinking you have to re-open the exported JPEG file in GIMP to make more edits is causing some confusion.

Peace...

Tom

/When we dance, you have a way with me,
Stay with me... Sway with me.../

When you make
an edit on the image and you export it, the JPEG doesn't "disappear" and the edited image still shows in the image window. It's that you want to see the _exported_ JPEG file to confirm the export resulted in the JPEG file you wanted to create for the client I think you're thinking you have to re-open the exported JPEG file in GIMP to make more edits is causing some confusion.

Not exactly, no, the edited image that is now on my screen, the xcf, is probably a resolution of 300 x 300 and may be a print size of 12 x 16; But the exported
image is a resolution of 72 and is not meant for printing. *That* is the one that I have to re-open (because I can't force it not to close when I export.) *That's* the one I have to mail, and if I decided to make a tweak, I can't just save and mail -- I have to export, re-open ... I don't see any way around the repeated reopenings except to make sure everything I do is perfect the first time, and that's even less likely than the developers reconsidering this. Thank you Tom.

gimp-user-list mailing list

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

Helen Etters
using Linux, suse12.3

Not exactly, no, the edited image that is now on my screen, the xcf, is probably a resolution of 300 x 300 and may be a print size of 12 x 16; But the exported
image is a resolution of 72 and is not meant for printing. *That* is the one that I have to re-open (because I can't force it not to close when I export.) *That's* the one I have to mail, and if I decided to make a tweak, I can't just save and mail -- I have to export, re-open ... I don't see any way around the repeated reopenings except to make sure everything I do is perfect the first time, and that's even less likely than the developers reconsidering this. Thank you Tom.

gimp-user-list mailing list

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

Are you saving these .jpg's in different sizes, one for emailing and one for printing ?

When you open a image in GIMP you are basically importing any image type into the software, so whilst you are editing in GIMP it is no longer a .jpg or .tif or other that you opened it is a .xcf file, hence why you now export. Where previous versions you opened a .jpg and you saved to .jpg, it was still a .xcf file while you where editing it but the software automatically saved it back to the format you opened it in, unless you selected .xcf or others to save it too.

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 16:12:06 -0400 From: etters.h@gmail.com
To: tomdkat@comcast.net
CC: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?

Not exactly, no, the edited image that is now on my screen, the xcf, is probably a resolution of 300 x 300 and may be a print size of 12 x 16; But the exported
image is a resolution of 72 and is not meant for printing. *That* is the one that I have to re-open (because I can't force it not to close when I export.) *That's* the one I have to mail, and if I decided to make a tweak, I can't just save and mail -- I have to export, re-open ... I don't see any way around the repeated reopenings except to make sure everything I do is perfect the first time, and that's even less likely than the developers reconsidering this. Thank you Tom.

I'm not making any sense of this at all. Image resolution is a piece of metadata and does not in any way dictate the size of the image as measured in actual image pixels. If you open an image whose tags say "300 dpi", when you save (or export) it the output file will contain that 300dpi setting. Now if the image is 12"x16" and tagged as 300dpi this means that the image's physical PIXEL dimensions are 3600x4800. And when you export this image to a JPG, that JPG will still be be 3600x4800 pixels large (and tagged as 300dpi) unless you specifically dictated to GIMP otherwise. Going to the Image menu and selecting "Resize image..." rescales the image to a different size in pixels (but doesn't necessarily change the dpi metadata); selecting "Print Size..." lets you set the dpi metadata directly, but doesn't change the pixel content of the image.

Also, when you export the image to a JPEG, if suddenly your open image window "disappears", well that is not supposed to happen at all and sounds something like a GIMP program crash, but we don't have enough information as is to determine that. And when GIMP crashes, you at least get a message telling you in no ambiguous terms that something crashed.

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

On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 08:03 -0700, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:30:43 +0200 From: schumaml@gmx.de
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?

. . . That's not perfect yet - for example, you lose the undo history . . .

How often is Undo history ACTUALLY needed by the user, beyond fixing a ten-seconds-ago mistake? I can't personally name a single application that stores undo history with the document's workfile; but if you can, let me know.

"no-one swims across the river here so we don't need a bridge"?

I've used commercial software that stored editing history in a database - you can go back through the entire history of most aircraft manuals and see all the edits, for example, for obvious legal reasons.

I've many times wished I could save undo history - e.g. I'm experimenting, but my flight is boarding or my battery is low.

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

On 06/16/2013 11:38 AM, Liam R E Quin wrote:

On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 08:03 -0700, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:30:43 +0200 From: schumaml@gmx.de
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?

. . . That's not perfect yet - for example, you lose the undo history . . .

How often is Undo history ACTUALLY needed by the user, beyond fixing a ten-seconds-ago mistake? I can't personally name a single application that stores undo history with the document's workfile; but if you can, let me know.

"no-one swims across the river here so we don't need a bridge"?

I've used commercial software that stored editing history in a database - you can go back through the entire history of most aircraft manuals and see all the edits, for example, for obvious legal reasons.

I've many times wished I could save undo history - e.g. I'm experimenting, but my flight is boarding or my battery is low.

Liam

Think about it. Undo history can actually save some users the hassle of an overlooked mistake. It's there quietly sitting in the corner not really berating the workflow. It's not like it's really affecting a smooth workflow.

Archie

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Helen wrote:

don't see any way around the repeated reopenings

Mmm... There's this difficult to catch bug... Sometimes when there are multiple images opened in the single-window mode, exporting an image that's among the first tabs to the left results in GIMP jumping to the last opened image (rightmost tab). That _could_ give an impression that GIMP closes an image.

Is that what's happening?

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

Andrew & Bridget wrote,

When you open a image in GIMP you are basically importing any image type into the software, so whilst you are editing in GIMP it is no longer a .jpg or .tif or other that you opened it is a .xcf file, hence why you now export. Where previous versions you opened a .jpg and you saved to .jpg, it was still a .xcf file while you where editing it but the software automatically saved it back to the format you opened it in, unless you selected .xcf or others to save it too.

I think there is some confusion here. As I understand it, when an image is open in GIMP and is being edited, the image you see is the display on screen of an "arrangement of pixels in memory", rather than a .xcf (or any other file format) file.

And that has been the process even before the change to the save/export process.

That is, .xcf. .jpg, and any other file to which you end up saving are file formats, not what is currently being edited in memory.

It's only when you save (which GIMP now limits to the .xcf file format), or export (to other file formats), that the "arrangement of pixels in memory" is rearranged again for whatever the on-disk file format requires.

Bob Long

Bob you are indeed correct as the image is held in the memory not a file type, the point I was trying to make was that the image is no longer a .jpg. I believe there is a little confusion here generally with what Helen is trying to do. I think she needs several scaled images.

Sent from my iPad

On 16 Jun 2013, at 06:54, Bob Long wrote:

Andrew & Bridget wrote,

When you open a image in GIMP you are basically importing any image type into the software, so whilst you are editing in GIMP it is no longer a .jpg or .tif or other that you opened it is a .xcf file, hence why you now export. Where previous versions you opened a .jpg and you saved to .jpg, it was still a .xcf file while you where editing it but the software automatically saved it back to the format you opened it in, unless you selected .xcf or others to save it too.

I think there is some confusion here. As I understand it, when an image is open in GIMP and is being edited, the image you see is the display on screen of an "arrangement of pixels in memory", rather than a .xcf (or any other file format) file.

And that has been the process even before the change to the save/export process.

That is, .xcf. .jpg, and any other file to which you end up saving are file formats, not what is currently being edited in memory.

It's only when you save (which GIMP now limits to the .xcf file format), or export (to other file formats), that the "arrangement of pixels in memory" is rearranged again for whatever the on-disk file format requires.

-- Bob Long

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

Also, when you export the image to a JPEG, if suddenly your open image window "disappears", well that is not supposed to happen at all and sounds something like a GIMP program crash, but we don't have enough information as is to determine that. And when GIMP crashes, you at least get a message telling you in no ambiguous terms that something crashed.

No, GIMP is not crashing.
The pix.xcf is still on the screen.

Old way: Create file 300x300, work on it. Save as orchard.xcf, all layers intact, everything fine. Scaled image to 72x72, named it Orchard-scaled.png (or .jpg if that's what they ask for).
I then had that Orchard-scaled.png on my screen and I could make changes if I wanted to before mailing it.
It seems I can't do that any more.
Now, if I want to see my 72x72 Orchard-scaled.png, I have to open it, and as soon as I open it, it becomes
a file that I can't mail because it's no longer a .png. So my Q, is there a way to open that .png, keep it a .png, tweak it if I want to, save the .png and mail it?

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

Helen Etters
using Linux, suse12.3

Helen wrote,

Also, when you export the image to a JPEG, if suddenly your open image window "disappears", well that is not supposed to happen at all and sounds something like a GIMP program crash, but we don't have enough information as is to determine that. And when GIMP crashes, you at least get a message telling you in no ambiguous terms that something crashed.

No, GIMP is not crashing.
The pix.xcf is still on the screen.

What you see on screen is not .xcf or .jpg or any FILE format.

Old way: Create file 300x300, work on it. Save as orchard.xcf, all layers intact, everything fine. Scaled image to 72x72, named it Orchard-scaled.png (or .jpg if that's what they ask for).

You have created a file on disk in the format .png (or .jpg).

I then had that Orchard-scaled.png on my screen and I could make changes if I wanted to before mailing it.

No, you do not have a ".png" "file" on your screen. You have a display of pixels that were unchanged when you saved to disk as .png. If you had saved as .jpg, the saving process would have lost information as it saved to disk but the memory image would have stayed unchanged and would not have lost any information.

So if you were thinking that what you were seeing on screen is exactly what the .jpg on disk would like, after the saving process lost information in creating the .jpg (and thus not needing to re-open the .jpg to check), then you were mistaken.

It seems I can't do that any more.

Nothing has changed in that regard.

Now, if I want to see my 72x72 Orchard-scaled.png, I have to open it, and as soon as I open it, it becomes
a file that I can't mail because it's no longer a .png.

As soon as you open it, you have as display on screen of the image. The file on disk has not been changed by opening it.

So my Q, is there a way to open that .png, keep it a .png, tweak it if I want to, save the .png and mail it?

Well, you open it, edit it, and export it (or, at least in my version, there is an "Overwrite..." option, but that of course will lose the previous version) as whatever file type you want, and mail it.

If I understand you, I think you are confusing what GIMP has in memory with what file format is actually stored on disk.

I suspect in your old workflow you have been presuming what what remained on screen was the same as a saved lossy format on disk.

And because of the same misunderstanding, you have presumed that the new export process required you to reload the image to see the result.

That second presumption is more correct, so strictly speaking your old process was not actually doing you what you thought it was.

Of course, depending on the degree of lossy-ness of the saved format, you may not be able to see the difference.

So, again, if I understand you, the new export process has actually revealed an error in your previous workflow.

Bob Long

On 06/15/13 22:38, Liam R E Quin wrote:

On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 08:03 -0700, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:30:43 +0200 From: schumaml@gmx.de
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ?

. . . That's not perfect yet - for example, you lose the undo history . . .

How often is Undo history ACTUALLY needed by the user, beyond fixing a ten-seconds-ago mistake? I can't personally name a single application that stores undo history with the document's workfile; but if you can, let me know.

"no-one swims across the river here so we don't need a bridge"?

I've used commercial software that stored editing history in a database - you can go back through the entire history of most aircraft manuals and see all the edits, for example, for obvious legal reasons.

I've many times wished I could save undo history - e.g. I'm experimenting, but my flight is boarding or my battery is low.

Liam

Office software, when you set it to display revisions, in a way saves undo history.

Yours in Christ,

Joseph A Nagy Jr
"Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge, But he who hates correction
is stupid." -- Proverbs 12:1
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
Original content CopyFree (F) under the OWL 
http://copyfree.org/licenses/owl/license.txt

On 15.06.2013 17:03, Richard Gitschlag wrote:

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:30:43 +0200

> From: schumaml@gmx.de
> To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ? >
> . . . That's not perfect yet - for example, you lose the undo history . . .

How often is Undo history ACTUALLY needed by the user, beyond fixing a ten-seconds-ago mistake?

You think about it as a way to correct mistakes.

Think about it as a way to change the history of anything done to the image.

Regards,
Michael

Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 08:40:34 -0500 From: jnagyjr1978@gmail.com
To: gimp-user-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] A sad case of regression ? [saving undo history]

On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 08:03 -0700, Richard Gitschlag wrote: How often is Undo history ACTUALLY needed by the user, beyond fixing a ten-seconds-ago mistake? I can't personally name a single application that stores undo history with the document's workfile; but if you can, let me know.

Office software, when you set it to display revisions, in a way saves undo history.

Come to think of it, I've used that. MS Word's "Track Changes" feature turns out to be quite useful when you're proofreading someone else's copy. But it is not a full undo history, just a diff between the original (oldest) and revised (newest) copies.

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

Ah, finally, some concrete specifics. Let me digest that...

Old way: Create file 300x300, work on it.

Okay, you now have one window/tab displaying your image. (Since this is just an example, I'm not going to question whether the image is 300x300 pixels or some arbitrary size tagged as 300dpi. But always include the unit-of-measure with a number.)

Save as orchard.xcf, all layers intact, everything fine.

Gotcha.

Scaled image to 72x72, named it Orchard-scaled.png (or .jpg if that's what they ask for).

Right, so you did indeed rescale the image size (and update the dpi to reflect the new pixel dimensions) and after that you output it as a separate file using a standard image format. No problems here.

I then had that Orchard-scaled.png on my screen and I could make changes if I wanted to before mailing it.

This is because in the 2.6 model the open image is named according to its most-recently-saved filename (regardless of file format). So yes, if say you forgot to add a watermark or something you could simply make the change and hit "Save" to re-output orchard-scaled.png . Note that by doing this you lose the ability to quickly save said changes back to your XCF unless/until you specifically tell GIMP to "Save As..." an XCF again. (Ironically, since you did an image rescale between the XCF and PNG, GIMP losing track of the XCF is probably a good thing.)

It seems I can't do that any more. Now, if I want to see my 72x72 Orchard-scaled.png, I have to open it, and as soon as I open it, it becomes a file that I can't mail because it's no longer a .png.

Not exactly. The open image window is labelled something along the lines of "Untitled [original filename]". 'Untitled' refers to the XCF associated with the open window (or in this case the lack thereof, since it was opened directly from a standard image file) but the window title does note that the image was nonetheless loaded from a file.

More importantly, the file on disk remains completely unchanged (and mailable); GIMP doesn't even place a lock on the file handle (unlike many commercial products); you could open your mail software and attach/send a copy of your PNG even while GIMP is still running.

I agree, though, in some cases you do want to verify what the exported file looks like, in which case you do need to open that file in a separate window/tab. No way around that, in fact there never was :(

So my Q, is there a way to open that .png, keep it a .png, tweak it if I want to, save the .png and mail it?

Yes, just use the "Export" commands instead of the "Save" commands, keeping in mind that in 2.8 Save only works on XCF files:

- When you are working on an XCF, you will be prompted for the filename (and assorted filetype options) the first time you hit the Export command, but after that, as long as GIMP remains open you can re-export that image at any time (with no additional prompts or dialogs) by using the "Export to [filename]" command.

- When you open a standard file format, one of the "Export" options will become "Overwrite [filename]" which is the equivalent of a quick save back to the original filename with as few GIMP prompts/dialogs as possible. (Note that in practice you should never do this with JPG files)

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

On 16.06.2013 15:03, Bob Long wrote:

So, again, if I understand you, the new export process has actually revealed an error in your previous workflow.

Revealing that misconception is one of the change's goals. See http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/Save_%2B_export_specification

Regards,
Michael

Helen wrote,

[I'm replying to the group so others can shoot me down if I'm wrong...]

I've tried to understand your disinctions (and thank you, I appreciate it) but I just can't
understand the relevance. I'm going to re-read. Not trying to be dense, but, whether
I call it a file or a display of pixels, the sticking point is that after I export to .jpg or
.png, I want that file (yes, I think it's a file) with the name orchare-scaled.png to be
on my screen and be editable. And it isn't.

Please explain what you mean by "it isn't" "on my screen." Previously you have used the word "disappears". Perhaps give exact, step-by-step keystroke/menu selections that you use and what happens.

I then had that Orchard-scaled.png on my screen and I could make

changes if
> I wanted to before mailing it.

No, you do not have a ".png" "file" on your screen. You have a display of pixels that were unchanged when you saved to disk as .png.

Well, but see, I dn't have that display of pixels, whatever we call it.

Please explain, as above.

If I want
to edit that "file" I have to open it. It opens with .xcf extension. I love the
.xcf extension when I'm working on it, but not when it's time to mail it.

> It seems I can't do that any more.

Nothing has changed in that regard.

Well, it has for me. I still have GIMP 2.6 on ubuntu laptop (but I don't want to work long
hours on a thinkpad) and it clearly has changed. I think I have not been able to explain
clearly, but GIMP -- at least at my house -- will edit only an assortment of pixel which
contain a filename with an .xcf extension.

GIMP will open any image file (that it is able to), not just .xcf files. Strictly, for non .xcf files, it will "import", but that is transparent to the user.

Consider .jpg as an example. Such a file is stored on disk in a compressed format. When GIMP opens it, it uncompresses the data and turns the information into "a display of pixels" on the screen. That information is now in memory, uncompressed.

I can't remember how 2.6 named the image window, but if it said "Orchard-scaled.jpg" (or png) it simply means that that is the file that was opened. It does not mean the contents in memory are in the same format as the data on a disk file of the same name.

(See http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/Save_%2B_export_specification for more details of how the title of the image window and naming works.)

In short, once you are editing an image, forget about the format of the file that was opened. It's no longer relevant. GIMP is working on a different "arrangement of pixels."

It's only when you save or export to disk again that GIMP will rearrange those pixels into a form required by the external file format.

In the case of .jpg, which is a lossy format, the saving process (2.6), or the export process (2.8), will throw away information that is deemed to be (relatively) unnoticeable to the human eye. But what remains in memory (whichever version of GIMP) is the complete lossless image.

Repeating: what is in memory is not a .png, .jpg. .gif or whatever, format anymore.

Which is why if a .jpg is repeatedly edited/saved (exported)/reopened it will lose quality.

I'm trying to understand but will have to go over this again. I do appreciate your patience.

Helen

Hope that helps.

Bob Long