3 ms·

Export and Save As should be the same menu item with an option in the dialog. There are many many more but start with the app having the overbearing assumption

by barrkel 2mo ago

Export and Save As should be the same menu item with an option in the dialog. There are many many more but start with the app having the overbearing assumption that it thinks you want save to its file format rather than make an ad hoc edit.

flufluflufluffy 2mo ago
That “overbearing assumption” is made by practically every other X-media editing app, for good reason — you can save your work and continue/revert stuff later. If all you’ve ever used is MS paint then I guess it’s an unexpected thing, but any other image/video editing app, digital audio workstation, 3D modeling software, etc… work exactly the same way. It would be unexpected to me if “save as” exported a flat file.
- account42 2mo ago
  Gimp doesn't save undo history in the XCF.
  - barrkel 2mo ago
    I guess the idea is you can do edits via non-destructive layer effects and compositing a stack of layers, where somewhere amongst the stack is your original unmolested data. Though that has not been my experience with Gimp - it's far more likely to want to to commit to a rasterizing decision far earlier than Photoshop would.
- barrkel 2mo ago
  I don't care. 99% of my uses of an image editor are for ad hoc edits. I never want to clutter my disk with project files on the off-chance I want to preserve layers or whatnot. I have zfs snapshots and cloud backups should I want to revert but the odds I want to revert an ad hoc image edit are approximately nil - I can never recall needing to do so. I don't use Gimp as a 3D modeling software or a digital audio workstation. I use it to add text to a family photo. The primary storage medium is jpeg. I don't want or need anything else. The real issues with Gimp start when you try to work with selections, transforms, cuts, crops and so on. Photoshop muscle memory doesn't transfer and it is so incredibly clunky.
  - Macha 2mo ago
    Then Gimp is the wrong tool for you. You’re using a excavator to pull out weeds. Use Pinta or KolourPaint instead.
    - barrkel 2mo ago
      How do you do drop shadow layer mask effects with Pinta and KolourPaint?
  - Joeboy 2mo ago
    > I use it to add text to a family photo. The primary storage medium is jpeg. I don't want or need anything else. So you open your photo, add your text, press Ctrl+E, choose a filename or press Enter to overwrite your old version, and press Enter to accept the default jpeg settings. I guess it could save a couple of keypresses by auto-overwriting your original file without asking, or not asking about jpeg settings. But it doesn't seem like an outrageous workflow, considering that other people will want those options. I do feel the same way as you about Photoshop muscle memory, having got quite good at it in the '90s and never really having caught up in Gimp.
  - saltcured 2mo ago
    I can empathize. I don't really care about the save vs export thing, as I have adapted to that and just go directly to export in the menu. But, as a long time but infrequent user, I really dislike the changes towards "non-destructive" UX that just seems to spawn endless layers and other forms of pixel buffer limbo that confuse me. Lately, it feels like I'm being slow walked by a passive-aggressive tool that wants to waste my time and mental energy. I wish there was a "novice" or "casual" user setting option to go back to a much simpler UX, where I am operating immediately on the selected layer. Where a pasted object can be dragged but anchors as soon as I touch something else, etc. Where filters preview but then "apply" immediately. Where undo can revert some recent changes but otherwise the effects accumulate destructively into the current layer. A naive user may never have to learn about layers, but they are still there when desired. I don't want a layer spawning on their own. I'll make the new layer before I start changing things, and I'll think deliberately how I want that layer filled. Then, I'll resume actions that immediately mutate it.
mort96 2mo ago
The difference between exporting and saving is extremely important, and is something the user must understand in order to prevent data loss.
- markstock 2mo ago
  And Gimp users are not more likely to know that? It adds up to extra clicks for 90% of the images I load.
  - em-bee 2mo ago
    how does the save/export distinction result in extra clicks? they are in the same menu right below each other. pick the right one. if you don't know you may pick the wrong one the first time, but after that you know. i find it faster than having to choose the format i want from a "save as" dialog
    - markstock 2mo ago
      It's when I want to close the image or the application - the extra click to confirm that, yes, I am aware this image was not "saved" and that I could be losing data. I admit I have not looked into whether I can disable that extra notification.
      - em-bee 2mo ago
        ok, fair point. i agree, that's a bit annoying. and ideally it should also tell whether changes are made after exporting.
    - markstock 2mo ago
      You just reminded me of a great feature that I think I first noticed in The Gimp: you don't have to search through the list of file types when exporting (I almost typed "saving"!), just type the extension in the file name and it'll save in that format! Love that part.
somat 2mo ago
I still think the original behavior where it just saves as whatever extension was entered as the name was one of the more enlightened ways to operate. I sort of get their point. The "Only one of these formats(the one you have never heard of) will save all aspects of your work, every other one will lose things, pick wisely." school of interface design is a massive footgun. But I like interfaces that get out of your way and just let you do things. And I just had a bright idea, "forget the save dialog, just use the export dialog for everything" but it turns out the export dialog will not let you save to .xcf My disappointment is immeasurable. Why not gimp team? You dashed my last hope for a single unified interface. Somebody had to go out of their way to take that out.

by barrkel 2mo ago

flufluflufluffy 2mo ago

That “overbearing assumption” is made by practically every other X-media editing app, for good reason — you can save your work and continue/revert stuff later. If all you’ve ever used is MS paint then I guess it’s an unexpected thing, but any other image/video editing app, digital audio workstation, 3D modeling software, etc… work exactly the same way. It would be unexpected to me if “save as” exported a flat file.

account42 2mo ago
Gimp doesn't save undo history in the XCF.
- barrkel 2mo ago
  I guess the idea is you can do edits via non-destructive layer effects and compositing a stack of layers, where somewhere amongst the stack is your original unmolested data. Though that has not been my experience with Gimp - it's far more likely to want to to commit to a rasterizing decision far earlier than Photoshop would.
barrkel 2mo ago
I don't care. 99% of my uses of an image editor are for ad hoc edits. I never want to clutter my disk with project files on the off-chance I want to preserve layers or whatnot. I have zfs snapshots and cloud backups should I want to revert but the odds I want to revert an ad hoc image edit are approximately nil - I can never recall needing to do so. I don't use Gimp as a 3D modeling software or a digital audio workstation. I use it to add text to a family photo. The primary storage medium is jpeg. I don't want or need anything else. The real issues with Gimp start when you try to work with selections, transforms, cuts, crops and so on. Photoshop muscle memory doesn't transfer and it is so incredibly clunky.
- Macha 2mo ago
  Then Gimp is the wrong tool for you. You’re using a excavator to pull out weeds. Use Pinta or KolourPaint instead.
  - barrkel 2mo ago
    How do you do drop shadow layer mask effects with Pinta and KolourPaint?
- Joeboy 2mo ago
  > I use it to add text to a family photo. The primary storage medium is jpeg. I don't want or need anything else. So you open your photo, add your text, press Ctrl+E, choose a filename or press Enter to overwrite your old version, and press Enter to accept the default jpeg settings. I guess it could save a couple of keypresses by auto-overwriting your original file without asking, or not asking about jpeg settings. But it doesn't seem like an outrageous workflow, considering that other people will want those options. I do feel the same way as you about Photoshop muscle memory, having got quite good at it in the '90s and never really having caught up in Gimp.
- saltcured 2mo ago
  I can empathize. I don't really care about the save vs export thing, as I have adapted to that and just go directly to export in the menu. But, as a long time but infrequent user, I really dislike the changes towards "non-destructive" UX that just seems to spawn endless layers and other forms of pixel buffer limbo that confuse me. Lately, it feels like I'm being slow walked by a passive-aggressive tool that wants to waste my time and mental energy. I wish there was a "novice" or "casual" user setting option to go back to a much simpler UX, where I am operating immediately on the selected layer. Where a pasted object can be dragged but anchors as soon as I touch something else, etc. Where filters preview but then "apply" immediately. Where undo can revert some recent changes but otherwise the effects accumulate destructively into the current layer. A naive user may never have to learn about layers, but they are still there when desired. I don't want a layer spawning on their own. I'll make the new layer before I start changing things, and I'll think deliberately how I want that layer filled. Then, I'll resume actions that immediately mutate it.

mort96 2mo ago

The difference between exporting and saving is extremely important, and is something the user must understand in order to prevent data loss.

markstock 2mo ago
And Gimp users are not more likely to know that? It adds up to extra clicks for 90% of the images I load.
- em-bee 2mo ago
  how does the save/export distinction result in extra clicks? they are in the same menu right below each other. pick the right one. if you don't know you may pick the wrong one the first time, but after that you know. i find it faster than having to choose the format i want from a "save as" dialog
  - markstock 2mo ago
    It's when I want to close the image or the application - the extra click to confirm that, yes, I am aware this image was not "saved" and that I could be losing data. I admit I have not looked into whether I can disable that extra notification.
    - em-bee 2mo ago
      ok, fair point. i agree, that's a bit annoying. and ideally it should also tell whether changes are made after exporting.
  - markstock 2mo ago
    You just reminded me of a great feature that I think I first noticed in The Gimp: you don't have to search through the list of file types when exporting (I almost typed "saving"!), just type the extension in the file name and it'll save in that format! Love that part.

somat 2mo ago

I still think the original behavior where it just saves as whatever extension was entered as the name was one of the more enlightened ways to operate. I sort of get their point. The "Only one of these formats(the one you have never heard of) will save all aspects of your work, every other one will lose things, pick wisely." school of interface design is a massive footgun. But I like interfaces that get out of your way and just let you do things. And I just had a bright idea, "forget the save dialog, just use the export dialog for everything" but it turns out the export dialog will not let you save to .xcf My disappointment is immeasurable. Why not gimp team? You dashed my last hope for a single unified interface. Somebody had to go out of their way to take that out.