Henning wrote:
> I can see good software-engineering reasons to want to eliminate
> indexed representation internally, but from a usability standpoint it
> will be a loss not to be able to restrict the possible color values to
> a predetermined palette.
I see it as a boost for usability when this whole indexed mode
disappears from the UI. To many user complaints are being
triggered by the possibility of working in different modes.
It is good thing when working in gimp is unambiguously in full
resolution and indexed becomes a matter of importing and exporting.
This will enable us to have a less schizophrenic UI.
And while exporting, one deals with the problem you describe here:
> Imagine finding out only after several hours of editing that some of
> the pixels you intended to be (255,192,53) accidentally became
> (255,192,54), and others became (255,188,53) and a few of the
> (64,64,0) became (64,64,3), and this is a source of immense confusion
> to software later your build process, which recognizes exactly those
> colors to have a special meaning, and now you have to go through a few
> dozen layers to find all of the misfit pixels and correct their color
> one layer and color at a time. Indexed editing prevents making the
> mistake in the first place; if I have not explicitly added
> (255,192,54) to the palette I know that I'll not risk finding it in
> the output.
--ps
principal user interaction architect
man + machine interface works
http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
