Save + Export proposal

[Bill Y.]

A clear distinction between Save and Export was needed

But even if conceptually different in practice ,   both operation are always
needed for the every edited image:
is needed to Save the original AND to export as jpg or png .

So why do not offer a chance to speed up the workflow, save time and
patience
achieving both result simultaneusly ?

A image is worth 1.000 words ,to avoid misunderstunding i invite to give a
look to this
mock up
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2653/3981269891_998c2f513b_o.jpg

As you may see the idea is not to replace the Export dialog, but  to offer a
handy option from the Save dialog, to simultaneously export , with same name
and in the same directory in other file formats

A possible objection is that "same name and some directory" is a severe limit
but

1) For other cases there is well the proper Export Dialog

2) consider a  real case

 if in 1 day i edit 50 photos, i  need to
go trought 150 Save and Export dialog (and as now to click away about 300
warning ) to save original,a looseness png or tiff copy, and a jpg of my work

Using that option at the end of the work, in case i wish original, png and
jpg in different folder i may get the result in 1 minute:

Is trivial filter the folder content for file extension and batch move all
xcf, png, and jpg in their own dedicated folder

Even Picasa, or xnview and irfanview may do in a heartbeat...so would be not
even needed to type a couple of  commands  in a terminal

1 minute Vs 100 additional dialogs




PS

i will appreciate a reply to this somehow connected technical question
http://www.gimpusers.com/forums/gimp-developer/12001-Gimp-file-save-interactive.html
 :
In case the above proposal will be rejected, and anyway
in time-while  i will really need a script doing something similar...script
is ready but that problem spoils the result








--
photocomix@... (via www.gimpusers.com)
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Omari Stephens-2]

photocomix@... wrote:
::snip? SNIP!::
> As you may see the idea is not to replace the Export dialog, but  to offer a
> handy option from the Save dialog, to simultaneously export , with same name
> and in the same directory in other file formats
Wouldn't this be fairly straightforward to do as a plugin/python-fu/script-fu?

Adding code makes things slower.  If this isn't something that would benefit the
vast majority of GIMP users (and I'm not sure it would), it seems better to
offer it as an option for those who want it, rather than to add extra code for
the users who won't touch it.

--xsdg
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Martin Nordholts-2]

Hi,

On 10/05/2009 02:10 AM, photocomix@... wrote:
> But even if conceptually different in practice ,   both operation are always
> needed for the every edited image:
> is needed to Save the original AND to export as jpg or png .

This assumption is wrong. Complex compositions will need to be refined for
weeks. All work is done in XCF. Before final delivery there is only an
occasional need to export to some other format.


 / Martin

--

Latest blog post Sunday, October 4, 2009:
"Single-window mode progress report"

My GIMP Blog:
http://www.chromecode.com/

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Liam R E Quin]

On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 22:24 +0200, Martin Nordholts wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 10/05/2009 02:10 AM, photocomix@... wrote:
> > But even if conceptually different in practice ,   both operation are always
> > needed for the every edited image:
> > is needed to Save the original AND to export as jpg or png .
>
> This assumption is wrong. Complex compositions will need to be refined for
> weeks. All work is done in XCF. Before final delivery there is only an
> occasional need to export to some other format.

Actually the two statements don't contradict each other -- it's fair
to say that the most likely workflows are
(1) load image (jpeg. png, tiff, cr2, etc)
    work on image
    maybe save image in proprietary format temporarily, between sessions
    eventually, do at least one of
    . save in archive format (tiff, png)
    . export to jpeg or gif or .mov or whatever
    . print

(2) create new image, and rest as above.

And in most cases you'll need to export the image at some point,
for every image.

It's got a little harder to track what you've done, now, because
you need to know if the export filenames are up to date as well
as the xcf filenme, and right now you can't tell.

E.g. an "image file history" panel showing save status, or
adding save & export events to the undo history (even though
you can't undo them they are part of the history) might help.

Liam


--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Bill Y.]

I send the mock up to the gimp-Ui brainstorm.

And for end users that may be interested ,in the while RobA cooked a script
that offer basically equivalent features

obviously can't offer same GUI of my mock up, but allow

1 ) to Save+Export , popping out a error message if the image was not already
saved
2 )to Save AS + Export ...this basically allow to run the Save As dialog as
usual and then automatically export copies in the chosen format

Actually Export only in jpg and png but should be trivial add more format
option

But has a price to crowd even more the File menu with 2 additional entries

while, in my opinion a similar added option to the Save dialogs will not
screw up the GUI and will be clear and handy .

Maybe no much feel the need as now but is hard feel the need for something
never experienced before...
Once experienced may be more clear that may be a time saver

anyway the script works may be easy edited to add more export format (for
example tiff, psd) and is here

http://ffaat.pointclark.net/incoming/scripts/save_and_export_1.2.scm





>> This assumption is wrong. Complex compositions will need to be refined
for
>> weeks. All work is done in XCF. Before final delivery there is only an
>> occasional need to export to some other format.

Your point is not too clear to me, i agree that a composition may take weeks,
but at the end (at least in most cases ) as, not only to be saved but also to
be exported

Sure would be much less needed for who has to export only once in week,and
much more needed by who has to export Save last edit +Export every 30 minutes

But as added option seems to me unobtrusive in that Spheciphic GUI and the
distiontion between SAVE and EXPORT is not only preserved but may even made
more clear (at least in the mock up)

--
photocomix (via www.gimpusers.com)
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Bill Y.]

i knew that Peter Sikking (or somebody else from Gimp UI brainstorm
staff)replied but the message get lost for technical problems (full storage
disk)

I am very interested to know the content of that reply,i hope you may send
again now

--
photocomix (via www.gimpusers.com)
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[peter sikking]

photocomix wrote:

> i knew that Peter Sikking (or somebody else from Gimp UI brainstorm
> staff)replied but the message get lost for technical problems (full  
> storage
> disk)

yes, I am (by default) the Gimp UI brainstorm staff, and I had about
3 threads going on here before the list collapsed.

> I am very interested to know the content of that reply,i hope you  
> may send
> again now


here we go:

OK, I waited with replying because I wanted to think about this  
carefully.
that is because quite a few issues are combining here.

first two fundamental issues:

1) let's face it: this is a new feature request. it is not that we
   broke something in this 50 pictures a day (10 minutes each) workflow.
   actually, on balance things got a bit better for this with clear
   saving and exporting.
2) an even bigger picture: does GIMP has to solve this problem?
   since part of what you want is a no-brainer conversion from
   png to jpeg. sounds like a job for a batch tool. this way you
   would save your GIMP file, then ctrl-shift-E, return, return,
   and GIMP does remember if you wanted TIFF or png all the time.
   run the batch job at the end of the day.

so why not add it anyway, doesn't hurt no? yes it does:

- by associating 2 or more export files, "Export to foo.png"
  (ctrl-E) has to be redesigned and never be as good as now.

- you have coupled saving to exporting of multiple files, hard.
  in general these things do not happen at the same time,
  saving work is a different thing then delivering. write
  times go up by a factor of 1+N, where N is the number of
  export formats.

- so it is easy to set (well, you will have to 50 times a day)
  but how to stop it for a file? it was in the Save dialog,
  but to get there again? Save as?

- UI also needs to be not-error-inducing and give a clear model
  to users to how things work. this proposal here is one of several
  to get a liiiiitle bit of export back into the Save dialog.
  each of these creates _a_ way to export, that users may figure
  out as _the_ way to export, because they are migrating from
  2.6 to 2.8. No, it does not help that we have clear Export on
  the File menu. we simply cannot let these models of export develop.

so that is why I am against this.

     --ps

         founder + principal interaction architect
             man + machine interface works

         http://mmiworks.net/blog : on interaction architecture



_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[RobA]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:02 AM, peter sikking  wrote:

> so that is why I am against this.
>
>     --ps

Even that said, anyone is free to develop a save and export plugin and
offer it up for public consumption.  It may not make it into the core,
but assuming it is worthwhile, it will find use.

-Rob A.
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Ilya Zakharevich]

    [Looks like every time I post, I kill the list.  My apologies; reposting]

On 2009-10-05, photocomix@... <forums@...> wrote:
> So why do not offer a chance to speed up the workflow, save time and
> patience
> achieving both result simultaneusly ?
>
> A image is worth 1.000 words ,to avoid misunderstunding i invite to give a
> look to this
> mock up
> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2653/3981269891_998c2f513b_o.jpg

Suppose you do this.  You edit something, and press C-s.  What would happen?

Ilya

_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Bill Y.]

probably this will be my last reply on the matter, i do not like insist
proposing something that someone else has to code, even if in this case
would be just a trigger for  not interactive call(s)

I divided the objection in 2 groups, the first group  focused on possible
disadvantages and technical problem ,

 ..the second in my opinion derived of some
misunderstanding of what proposed, or how i proposed to implement


In the first group

>- so it is easy to set (
>but how to stop it for a file? it was in the Save >dialog,
>but to get there again? Save as?

>Suppose you do this. You edit something, and press >C-s. What would happen?

Correct ,  i was too generic in proposing the change for "the save dialogs"

let focus in the "Save as" dialog,  in that case i can't image any similar
problems
(For who wish something as "save+export"  a third party script
 may be a better option and the script already exist)

#################################
Then there is the second group of objection:
 a lot complains about  the risk to complicate the code
or on the work needed to modify both the Save and Export function

>so why not add it anyway, doesn't hurt no? yes it does:

>- by associating 2 or more export files, "Export to foo.png"
>(ctrl-E) has to be redesigned and never be as good as now.

>- you have coupled saving to exporting of multiple files, hard.
>in general these things do not happen at the same time,
>saving work is a different thing then delivering. write
>times go up by a factor of 1+N, where N is the number of
>export formats.



>- UI also needs to be not-error-inducing and give a clear model
>to users to how things work. this proposal here is one of several
>to get a liiiiitle bit of export back into the Save dialog.
>each of these creates _a_ way to export, that users may figure
>out as _the_ way to export, because they are migrating from
>2.6 to 2.8. No, it does not help that we have clear Export on
>the File menu. we simply cannot let these models of export develop.

well i can't see nothing to redesign (except a detail in the Save as dialog)
neither any need to re-associate files or redesign ctrl_E

Because i do not propose any change for the save function, but basically
only
 a modification to the GUI of "save AS"
 
 Sure any change in the GUI is connected to a change in the code
 
 But in this case not to a change in the Save as functions:
that "export copy too as"would be there just because is most handy for users
there, but will not interfere on how the Save function will work but just add
not interactive call(s) after saving will be done

So whatever user will chose Save as will work as usual with no any change, no
interference, no complications
 
just at the end "Export" will be called
  in not interactive way passing as arguments the filename,
  the directory used to save and the chosen file formats(my mock up show how
chose
   the file format ) and for the rest the user deafault.

   
   Export function does not need any modification to support not interactive
call
   (as far i know):
   
   If the user chose to Save as+ export a jpg ...a not interactive call will
be done
 if user wish also also png  , a second call would be done to "export as
png"
 using for the rest the identical arguments  (same filename and directory +
user defaults
 chosen for that format)
---   ----- ----
 
 please allow me a metaphor
 Eat and Drink are 2 different concept ,no less then Save and Export
 
 Suppose you go in a Restaurant to eat, you order your food then you ask
 "do you have something to drink ?"
 
And the waiter reply
 "sure we have!..but drinking is a different concept and we do not want
create confusion
 in our clients.

 we have a separate room for who wish to drink, you will be welcome there
 Obviously  eating there is not allowed, that is for drink...but you are free
to
  change room anytime you feel thirsty and get back here when you wish to eat
"



 
  The fact that 2 things are conceptually different do not exclude that may
be much better achieve both simultaneously
 


--
photocomix (via www.gimpusers.com)
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Nicolas Robidoux]

An idea (especially for when GIMP moves to GEGL). Apologies if this
has been suggested/shot down before.

I think that the following terminology would be fairly clear to users:

  Save IMAGE (basically, export to a non-xcf format)

  Save PROJECT (save the xcf/gegl tree)

  Save WORKSPACE (save the current configuration of GIMP, not the
  xcf/gegl tree or the image: visible tools, visible non image windows
  etc)

IMHO, this 3-pronged "save" option makes it pretty clear what this is
about.

I suggested earlier that "Save workspace" (like nip2) should be the
non-export quick save, but eventually realized that a "workspace"
suggests a set of easily accessible tools organized to fit a specific
TYPE of project.

On the other hand, "Save project' suggests that all the components of
the intended final image should be kept around.

"Save image" really suggests that what you are saving is the final
product, in a common image format, that is, it corresponds to
exporting.

Nicolas Robidoux
Universite Laurentienne
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@...
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer