Re: [Gimp-user] import vs open

[<jfrazierjr nc rr com>]

> Now, the objective of Gimp seems to stay in the fields of amateur and 
> therefore to delegate the role of single photo$hop image editor for 
> professionals. 

BS! I would posit that amateurs invoke DESTRUCTIVE editing techniques(because they don't know any better) 
while professionals do the strive for the NON-DESTRUCTIVE techniques(or should).  

One of the main feature goals of Gimp is to get to a point, over the next several release versions, of non 
destructive editing.  This save/export feature change is but one step in a series of releases to enforce this 
philosophy(as much as possible.)  You STILL have the option of destroying the original image file, but now 
you are forced to provide your consent by performing an explicit "export" as opposed to the previous "open", 
"edit", "save" in prior versions.  You may be a "professional", but even professional's are human and make 
mistakes.  While I am not a "professional", I have made plenty of mistakes which destroyed the original 
image(though most of the time in a recoverable way..but not always), this new workflow totally prevents this 
as an accident and this is a good thing.  As a potential client, knowing what I know right now, I would 
NEVER, EVER, EVER work with any "professional" who overwrites the original image file with his edits... no 
matter how good he/she think they are they are human and it's a hell of a lot easier to NOT destroy the 
original than it is to fix it after its been damaged.  

Since I and a few others have noted this previously, could you please signal that you understand the 
reasoning?  I don't expect you to necessarily accept it to be accurately reflect your opinions on the matter 
or that you agree, only that you *understand*.