|
> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:40:47 +0200 > From: simon budig de > To: gimp-user-list gnome org > Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Save, Save As and Export separated? > > Richard Gitschlag (strata_ranger hotmail com) wrote: > > Okay, then what purpose does the "Save a copy" command do these days > > when from the user's perspective the ONLY difference between it and > > "Export" is the target file format? I suggested it once that the > > former should now be treated as a variation of Export. > > I don't know the reasoning behind that one. Sorry. > > Bye, > Simon > -- "Save a Copy": - Does not clean the image status (GIMP will still ask to save any changes) - Does not change the image-file association for future Save operations "Export": - Does not clean the image status - Does not change the image-file association for future Save operations Expressed in those terms they do look virtually identical, don't they? In 2.6, Save a Copy more or less WAS an export command anyway. Professional workflow would be that when you're operating on an XCF image you "Save" the XCF and "Save a Copy" anything else ... no problems, no lost work. Except that apparently a lot of people only ever used the "Save" command, which is what led to so many people losing work when they quit GIMP. So IMHO we have one command on the File menu that is extremely similar (especially in the eyes of the user) to another, and it was probably never actually getting used in the first place. If I could find a good analogy, it would be like ... I dunno, like having two separate Levels commands where one is intended solely for grayscale and the other solely RGB. -- Stratadrake strata_ranger hotmail com -------------------- Numbers may not lie, but neither do they tell the whole truth. |