On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 09:59:18AM -0400, Robert L Krawitz wrote: > > Think of the quality setting as an indication of expectations rather > than a specific outcome. It may not be possible to get the exact same > outcome (and obviously -- at least to us -- there's no way to > retroactively "improve" the result), but the quality setting could be > treated as the user's expectation for the result. Just a stupid user here, but interested in this thread since it is something I do all the time. I have Shift-S configured to change the image size, and of course Ctrl-S is by default configured to save file. I can't remember how many times I have hit the Ctrl by mistake, and now am quite distressed to understand that the image which I uploaded from my camera and then deleted from the memory card has now been degraded to a different quality than it was.... Definitely a bug, not a feature, IMHO. Just curious, what would be so wrong with saving the original file as a backup before doing a destructive save? Emacs only bites me when I'm *really* stupid.... I am so glad that Guillermo stuck by his guns and apparently *finally* got the developers to realise the illogic of this "feature". If more of us users would be as persistent instead of just going away after the initial knee-jerk "you don't know enough to even be talking to us" response which seems too prevalent here, maybe the Gimp would become all that it can be. Scott Swanson _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
