On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: >> I don't know if you read the *-users@ list, but "the perfectly >> workable" solution has just bit yet another user in the butt. > > Sure. That doesn't mean you should optimize for protecting against mistakes > like this *at the expense* of day to day use -- particularly if aiming at > professionals. (A common user experience design mistake!) Perhaps you came late to the discussion. Several team members including myself already mentioned before that we had observed professionals liking the change and not quite understanding what all this fuzz is about. You will find it difficult to explain how this was a figment of our imagination. Perhaps you could start with studying _actual_ response from the "day to day use" world? > That would be fine thing to say if Krita were the same kind of software, but > it is not. (Specifically, is "the full-featured painting application for > digital artists".) I find it interesting that you rely on official statements rather that pure and unadorned reality. While Krita indeed has a strong bias towards digital painting, it just so happens that quite a few universal and non-painting specific features managed to crawl inside the application over the last few year, including, but not limited to: - PSD importing - color managed printing - simple object selection tool (a-la GIMP) - unified transformation tool AFAIK, Dmitry Kazakov's work on performance was triggered by his interest in Krita as a tool for digital photography. Or here is an interview I did with the team lead and a major contributor in 2008: http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entry/interview-with-krita-developers-2008 You will find 2nd and 3rd Q/A most enlightening. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
