mtPaint development

Message

wjaguar · #21 Post by **wjaguar** » Fri 02 Jan 2009, 20:18

Flash wrote:If Puppy 4.1.2 already has all that's needed to activate View Exif data, how do I do it?

What it does have is a substitute ('exiv2') and the supporting library ('libexif'); the 'exif' program itself isn't packaged with libexif.
So you either get a compiled 'exif' program from somewhere, or tell mtPaint to use 'exiv2' instead: open "File->Actions->Configure", select "View EXIF data", and in the "Command" field, replace "exif" with "exiv2".

#22 Post by **Flash** » Sat 03 Jan 2009, 03:41

Thanks! I'll try that ASAP.

#23 Post by **ttuuxxx** » Sat 03 Jan 2009, 03:45

Hey flash try this version, I just compiled the latest and didn't need any extras, this is on a clean booted 4.1 cd
Plus my version for some odd reason is almost 1/2 the size of muggins'
ttuuxxx

#24 Post by **Flash** » Sat 03 Jan 2009, 15:46

Thanks, ttuuxxx. I'll try it out sometime this weekend. Does it replace the mtPaint that comes with Puppy?

#25 Post by **ttuuxxx** » Sat 03 Jan 2009, 22:37

yes it does, but if your using 4.0+ series, it should work out of the box.

#26 Post by **Flash** » Sun 04 Jan 2009, 23:49

ttuuxxx, your .pet works fine. I guess I misunderstood though, and thought you meant the "View Exif data" option would work. It doesn't. Neither does changing the "configure file actions" to use exiv2 instead of exif cause the Exif data to show when "View Exif data" is clicked. What happens now is that this appears in Leafpad:

Usage: exiv2 [ options ] [ action ] file ...

Manipulate the Exif metadata of images.

On the other hand, now that I know about exiv2, I tried it out and was able to view Exif data by entering

Code: Select all

exiv2 pr <file>

in a rxvt window.

aarf · #27 Post by **aarf** » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 13:43

mtpaint improvement: serial screen shot that could then be exported as .gif or .swf so that we can have a movie of things like "how to configure wifi"

#28 Post by **ttuuxxx** » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 14:01

also the new Apng format looks like puppy might be supporting it, so I guess if possible being able to edit apng and creat apng files, Apng is like an animated gif, it works on firefox3.0 +. I compiled the latest firefox with system support for it and it looks great.
some moving samples of rotating planets are located
http://animatedpng.com/index.php/sample ... e/#more-26
and info about apng can be found at http://animatedpng.com/
it could be tricky because the default format for apng is ".png" its just a patch that goes overtop the main png sources, most of the larger linux distros also are supporting this new format.
ttuuxxx

wjaguar · #29 Post by **wjaguar** » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 15:50

aarf wrote:mtpaint improvement: serial screen shot that could then be exported as .gif or .swf so that we can have a movie of things like "how to configure wifi"

With mtPaint 3.29, it can be done this way:
- when grabbing the screenshots, check the "Undoable" box: this will get them stored as sequence of undo frames;
- then, use "File->Export undo frames" to save all of them as a numbered sequence of images;
- then use some other tool (say Gifsicle or ImageMagick) to convert this sequence into a single animated file.

At the moment, mtPaint does not work with animated GIFs directly - it calls Gifsicle to split them into frames and to merge them back. Builtin GIF animation support is planned for the next major version; and the SWF format is closed, so is impossible to support even if I wished to.

ttuuxxx wrote:also the new Apng format looks like puppy might be supporting it, so I guess if possible being able to edit apng and creat apng files

Like GIF animation, this depends on getting support for animated sequences built into mtPaint; after that is done, extending PNG save/load code to support APNG will not be all that complex.

#30 Post by **ttuuxxx** » Sat 10 Jan 2009, 16:19

the new patched png with Apng support is located below, also include are the dev

They been tested in firefox 3.1b2 and work perfectly

ttuuxxx

aarf · #31 Post by **aarf** » Sun 11 Jan 2009, 06:42

and the SWF format is closed, so is impossible to support even if I wished to.

gimp under "presentation" manages to export .swf

aarf · #32 Post by **aarf** » Sun 11 Jan 2009, 07:20

aarf wrote:
and the SWF format is closed, so is impossible to support even if I wished to.
gimp under "presentation" manages to export .swf

think it should be Open Office under "presentation". at least one of the open sourced can do .swf
Edit:
Yes it is OpenOffice Impress presentation.
Edit:
five minutes in openoffice impress:
http://www.badongo.com/vid/987272
you may need to click it for it to go forward t the next page. this version seems unable to add automatic screen changes.
Nice of badongo.com to host .swf now.

wjaguar · #33 Post by **wjaguar** » Sun 11 Jan 2009, 17:09

aarf wrote:think it should be Open Office under "presentation". at least one of the open sourced can do .swf

Remember the size of the beast. Open Office is beyond huge - it is enormous; one can have a complete OS using a tenth of that space. So having everything, up to and including Out house sink, in there is only to be expected.

The smallest open-source SWF writer I found is 100+ Kb (http://www.swftools.org/); given that entire mtPaint binary is less than 500 Kb, this is prohibitively large size for an export filter. And if one needs an SWF slideshow, he can use the 'png2swf' tool from the link above, to produce it from a sequence of PNGs (or 'jpeg2swf' and a sequence of JPGs); no real need for me to waste significant space building that same tool into mtPaint.

linuxcbon · #34 Post by **linuxcbon** » Sun 11 Jan 2009, 17:47

It would be good not to have the settings toolbar appearing when starting it.
File-actions are useless ?
Help menu is too much on the right.

wjaguar · #35 Post by **wjaguar** » Sun 11 Jan 2009, 19:08

linuxcbon wrote:It would be good not to have the settings toolbar appearing when starting it.

Hide it, and it won't appear - mtPaint remembers settings toolbar's state across sessions.

File-actions are useless ?

Everything in this world is useless to one unwilling to learn how to use it.
Actions are configurable; it is user's responsibility to modify them to match his system's specifics and personal preferences.

Lobster · #36 Post by **Lobster** » Mon 12 Jan 2009, 05:48

Everything in this world is useless to one unwilling to learn how to use it.

Learn how to use it?
We end users are so much trouble . . .

wjaguar these two Puppy forum guys might be able to help you with better icons (assuming you believe they can be improved upon) for Mtpaint - say Lobster sent you

jebaJQ8
rastapax

wjaguar · #37 Post by **wjaguar** » Mon 12 Jan 2009, 08:28

Lobster wrote:Learn how to use it?
We end users are so much trouble . . .

From a programmer's side, it looks less than funny.
Consider this: I, the coder, spent how much time and effort designing, implementing, debugging, packaging; and all that by my own self. And after that, some user compains that he doesn't want to spend five minutes looking into the manual; he says he's "too busy" or whatever.
What this really feels like - is that said user considers me so much below a menial, and my time so much less valuable than his own, that uncountable hours of my time cost less than five minutes of his.

Think of it - and you'll understand the disconnect between developers and users. When I get treated like dirt, it is only natural for me to return the "courtesy" - and then users start complaining that "arrogant developers just ignore them"...

Lobster · #38 Post by **Lobster** » Mon 12 Jan 2009, 09:50

You may be right. Users should read the manual.

I do not read the manual when using a word processor.
I know how to use one.
Same with a spreadsheet.
Same with most programs.

If I have to access the manual it is because I want to access advanced features.
Ease of use is not an afterthought. It is integral to how people use a program. If it is unclear or obscure or difficult, who is responsible for this?

And yes developers are undervalued. You know all this. We have gone over it before.
Good developers have a habit of listening to users and implementing. I for one am happy with mtpaint but I am unhappy that I only access the tip of the iceberg.

I am offering you the possibility of clearer icons because I believe they are obscure. You can have the grace to make use of this or berate me for being like 90% or more of users not interested or prepared to read manuals. Programs would work perfectly if only they remained unused by people .. . ..

I know you have added features to mtpaint, if these are not accessed (for reasons known as 'human behaviour') then I feel we have to come up with a realistic solution. Is that what you want too?

Software ergonomics are important. If you feel they are not, then I am at a loss to understand how a program where new features are not accessed is developing?

Apart from reading the manual, what feedback or help can we suggest or offer?

wjaguar · #39 Post by **wjaguar** » Mon 12 Jan 2009, 12:31

Lobster wrote:I do not read the manual when using a word processor.
I know how to use one.

You lost some important details in this statement; *now* you know how to use *one specific brand* of word processor - and *maybe* can feel your way through an imperfect imitation of same. You weren't born with the knowledge; you were forced to acquire it - maybe indirectly, just by everyone around you using that specific product, but still forced.
And now you want all other word processors ever to exist to imitate that one specific brand which you know. Understandable - but not rational.

Ease of use is not an afterthought. It is integral to how people use a program. If it is unclear or obscure or difficult, who is responsible for this?

"Ease of use" is a marketing fantasy. I lost count of weird problems with "The One True Word Processor" that made users run to me for help - and still, people forget about all that the next day, but are ready and willing to hate OOo for some button not being in the "proper" place.
People use whatever software they cannot avoid using, and rationalize having to use it into "liking" it - and likely rationalize their unwillingness to learn anything else into reasons to dislike it. Take any GIMP-vs-Photoshop flamewar for a ready example.

This is why I focus on features, binary size and efficiency - when for some niche there is no other realistic choice except mtPaint, then users in that niche learn to like mtPaint.

I am offering you the possibility of clearer icons because I believe they are obscure.

Life taught me that the time to take an offer of something seriously is when the offered stuff is on my harddrive - and not before. Saved me a lot of disappointment.

Programs would work perfectly if only they remained unused by people .. . ..

Exactly the reason why the majority of FOSS projects are "by programmers for programmers".

Software ergonomics are important. If you feel they are not, then I am at a loss to understand how a program where new features are not accessed is developing?

Don't tell me of "software ergonomics" when people not only use Photoshop and GIMP, but learn to like them.

The kind of ergonomics I care about, is one supported by use cases - if some real-world task is awkward to do using the interface, then the interface needs improvement, but if the only problem with the interface is that it is unfamiliar, then so be it.
Quite a few things are *really* awkward and limited in a "standard" (aka Photoshop-clone) interface; and in these areas, mtPaint goes its own way: channels, modes, "gradient placement".
And other things might be good to have in principle, but are either uninteresting, or too much work for too little gain. Skinnable interface is one example.

And remember that any new feature in mtPaint has at least one user: either myself, or Mark Tyler.

So if something is done a certain way, it is because one of us considered it best (or, at least, good enough) for his own use. And if the way it is done turns out to be wrong for some other use, to get it fixed I need to at least know what the problem is.

Apart from reading the manual, what feedback or help can we suggest or offer?

Like I said - use cases. Things which users want to do with mtPaint, and for which mtPaint is currently deficient, or awkward to use. I use mtPaint in certain ways for certain tasks, but (naturally) I do not even think of some things which someone else would want from a graphics editor.

#40 Post by **Flash** » Mon 12 Jan 2009, 12:56

There's a manual for mtPaint? Where is it? Should I Google for it?

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

mtPaint development