On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 05:02:22PM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: > First of all, sorry for not getting back to you earlier. ok, thanks better later than never :) I can better understand your situation by now. Im just wondering how could this avoid your attention during the core code development, since this is a fundamental flaw I think. In my imagination it looks like during testing you have choosen images only with small amount of pixels or something like that, or maybe in the beginning the aim was to satisfy only a lower quality deamand for web graphics, not the professional digital imaging (which obiviously was not so popular in the early stage of gimp development). Im just guessing it is not against anyone, Im just curious .. you might tell me the real history if gimp from that aspect. > That's not much for a larger company and any donations would help. > So if you, or anyone else reading this, is willing and able to > help, please let us know. Well, saidly we are not out of the larger companies. Our organization is really small, it is a "photo shop" indeed. So I guess we stuck to Photoshop and windows till the case solved. We will kindly support you from our profit if we can benefit from your software, but at this point this is not much, maybe a 100Eu or sg. like that. -- _(_)_ (_. o_) F3CZ0 (_,) http://feczo.koli.kando.hu ( ) __________________________ // //
