On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Graeme Gill wrote: > gg wrote: >> Indeed, but he does have a point. I also find this export jive to be contrived. If I "open" a file >> and then save it I expect it to be the same file not something else. > > It's completely contrived, to work around the technical limitation that Gimp doesn't > track what features are used in its internal storage format, so it can't > tell if it will loose information when saved back to the original file format. > If it did track this, it would be possible to open, edit and then save to jpeg, > just like (ahem..) that other image editing program does. I suggest you actually try GIMP 2.6 or even 2.4. Personally I don't see a constructive discussion arising from assumptions that have nothing to do with actual state of affairs. GIMP had been understanding this stuff and warning about flattening of layers since dawn of times. With 2.8 we simply removed those annoying dialogs. > [And no, the compression ratio "problem" for jpeg is a red herring. It's > not that hard to extract the quantisation tables on open, and then carry > them through to be used by default on save. ] The code to read quantization tables dates back at the very least to 2007. It's in plug-ins/jpeg/jpegqual.c. Is it really important to discuss imaginary technical deficiences? Why? Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
