Alexander Rabtchevich wrote:
> I think you are too biased towards xcf as an everyday storage
> format. It is not needed very often, at least for now. May I provide
> my usual workflow?
I read your workflow and I am confident that when you try it out
you will find that we support it well with the Export command and
even repeated exporting during your editing session with the
'Export to <your file>.jpg' command. The initial critique on the
specification made us focus hard to re-evaluate and improve
these parts of the spec.
The indicator I cannot do because its price (confusion) is too high.
I simply have to make a trade-off between your kind of use and
high-end use that (also for photo) always includes layers and
other GIMP specific stuff. The high-end simply has a higher
priority, and your kind of use is well supported. This change
has been discussed for a long time (like at last year's lgm),
but before I came up with the 'Export to ...' solution we
would have not dreamed to put this in. Exactly because your
kind of secondary workflow would have been badly supported.
--ps
founder + principal 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
