From: Telcontar <res...@te...> - 2004-08-27 15:32:49
|
I have had a go at reworking the Gaim login/about logo with higher-quality graphics and the modern "AIM man" appearance. A page with a PNG copy, a downloadable copy of the master PSD file and editing notes is here: <http://telcontar.net/store/temp/Gaimlogo/> Perfectionists (including whoever was responsible for the current "AIM man" icon) may wish to take the image and make some improvements. Hope it is of use to you. - Dan. [I am not on the list; please CC me in replies] |
From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2004-08-27 15:49:31
|
Telcontar spake unto us the following wisdom: > I have had a go at reworking the Gaim login/about logo with higher-quality > graphics and the modern "AIM man" appearance. A page with a PNG copy, a > downloadable copy of the master PSD file and editing notes is here: >=20 > <http://telcontar.net/store/temp/Gaimlogo/> While this is a nice looking logo, I think I speak for many people here when I say that a PhotoShop master source is unacceptable. Most of the gaim developers do not use, nor do we wish to use, nor do we (at least some of us) have any respect for those who do use Windows. The ultimate source format must be an open format for any part of Gaim. (And ... I don't want to hear "but gimp can open PSD".) Ethan --=20 The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy for evils]. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. -- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764 |
From: Telcontar <res...@te...> - 2004-08-27 16:05:29
|
> While this is a nice looking logo, I think I speak for many people here > when I say that a PhotoShop master source is unacceptable. Most of the > gaim developers do not use, nor do we wish to use, nor do we (at least > some of us) have any respect for those who do use Windows. Hello? Yes I am running Gaim in Windows (for reasons I do not have to explain to you here), but did all the design work on a Macintosh. If you are going to attempt to insult me as being below respect, first try to at least base such efforts on fact instead of fiction. > The ultimate source format must be an open format for any part of Gaim. (And > ... I don't want to hear "but gimp can open PSD".) Are you always this helpful to those trying to do you a favour? You might just find that some people out there use Windows and Mac OS for reasons ranging from work through to friends' and significant others' machines. The majority of my Windows usage for the last few years has been at university and at a friend's, I have been and still am a Mac user. Thus, it is not difficult to deduce that, contrary to your high horse attitude, lots of open source users may also have access to Photoshop and other operating systems, and may be quite happy to convert the file into something you are able to use, although that may quite possibly destroy it in the process. Besides, you also overlooked the fact that there is a rendered PNG copy of the logo on the page, that you can use as-is without needing Photoshop. That version alone is significantly better than the original and can be used in the meantime until someone can convert the PSD into a file that the rest of you are prepared to open. It doesn't hurt to TRY once in a while instead of complain. |
From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2004-08-27 16:15:51
|
Telcontar spake unto us the following wisdom: > > While this is a nice looking logo, I think I speak for many people here > > when I say that a PhotoShop master source is unacceptable. Most of the > > gaim developers do not use, nor do we wish to use, nor do we (at least > > some of us) have any respect for those who do use Windows. >=20 > Hello? Yes I am running Gaim in Windows (for reasons I do not have to > explain to you here), but did all the design work on a Macintosh. If you = are > going to attempt to insult me as being below respect, first try to at lea= st > base such efforts on fact instead of fiction. Or photoshop on mac, whatever... If you're not using Windows, then you don't need to cry into your cheerios about the fact that I am disgusted with those who do. > > The ultimate source format must be an open format for any part of Gaim.= (And > > ... I don't want to hear "but gimp can open PSD".) >=20 > Are you always this helpful to those trying to do you a favour? I don't think requiring an open format for the sources to an open source program is at all unreasonable... > You might just find that some people out there use Windows and Mac OS for > reasons ranging from work through to friends' and significant others' > machines. The majority of my Windows usage for the last few years has been > at university and at a friend's, I have been and still am a Mac user. I thought you didn't need to justify this... > Thus, it is not difficult to deduce that, contrary to your high horse > attitude, lots of open source users may also have access to Photoshop and > other operating systems, and may be quite happy to convert the file into > something you are able to use, although that may quite possibly destroy it > in the process. Sure, a lot of users may have access to photoshop. That doesn't make the photoshop format open. > Besides, you also overlooked the fact that there is a rendered PNG copy of > the logo on the page, that you can use as-is without needing Photoshop. T= hat > version alone is significantly better than the original and can be used in > the meantime until someone can convert the PSD into a file that the rest = of > you are prepared to open. There are also binaries available on the Gaim web site, but if we don't build binaries for your platform, then you're going to need the source. These are two completely different topics. Ethan --=20 The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy for evils]. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. -- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764 |
From: Telcontar <res...@te...> - 2004-08-27 17:01:48
|
> Or photoshop on mac, whatever... If you're not using Windows, then you > don't need to cry into your cheerios about the fact that I am disgusted > with those who do. But you put me on that level immediately without considering anything. > I don't think requiring an open format for the sources to an open source > program is at all unreasonable... If you actually stopped long enough to think positively instead of finding the fastest negative way to pre-emptively halt anyone's helpful efforts, we might actually get somewhere. You might have a problem with Photoshop, but it seems that you also have a desire to condemn the whole task of improving the logo because of it, without considering that not everyone else might share your views. As I tried to explain previously, someone else here might be willing to use Photoshop in Windows or Mac OS on a machine at work, at university, at a friend's house, or even a machine of their own, to convert the file into a format you can accept. Other people here might even want to work on it more IN Photoshop (simply given its power), because even if you don't like it, others might not have a problem with it. The end result need not be a PSD file. I never stated once that you must distribute the PSD file with the Gaim source or any other such nonsense, you can convert it into whatever format suits you first with my blessing and distribute that format instead. Give things a little bit of positive thought first. However, in the light of Sean's comment, it may after all be better to just stick with the basic rendered PNG for the moment until a wholly new logo comes along. |
From: Sean E. <sea...@gm...> - 2004-08-27 18:42:42
Attachments:
gaim-logo.xcf
|
To keep this from getting *too* out of hand, attached is the logo that started this thread in .xcf format. Trying to send us a Photoshop file is akin to trying to send us a Word document. It doesn't go over well on a Free software mailing list. The .PNGs, of course, are perfectly acceptible, but if someone would prefer the flexibility to modify it of a Photoshop document, they can use this .xcf. -s. |
From: Telcontar <res...@te...> - 2004-08-27 19:07:33
|
> Trying to send us a Photoshop file is akin to trying to send us a Word > document. Except that I've never heard as much dissatisfaction against Adobe as I have against Microsoft. And Photoshop does what it does for good reason, whereas Word has a degree of a tendency to not. > It doesn't go over well on a Free software mailing list. Ever heard that gift horse saying? I think some of you are stuck on a *high* horse... > The .PNGs, of course, are perfectly acceptible, ... Do you know WHY I use PNG? Aside the better compression and 24-bit support, I changed to PNG more than anything out of respect for open source software developers and their issues with the GIF format. However, I have not thus far encountered any programs that have direct and complete Photoshop support - after all, there is a lot of layer effect use in the original PSD. I do know of the GIMP, but if the GIMP can open PSD files exactly as they were created, then there's no big deal about you opening one. If you can tell me an open source program I can run in Mac OS 9 or Windows 2000 that can generate an image as good as the one I created - and by "good" I am referring all the layer effects used for shadows, light, shading and transparency, the paths system used for the vector graphics (an invaluable tool - especially for regenerating layers), and so forth, then please enlighten me and maybe I can stop being so offensive to you. I'm only using Photoshop 5 so at least I don't need anything to match Photoshop CS. |
From: Sean E. <sea...@gm...> - 2004-08-27 19:31:11
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 20:07:15 +0100, Telcontar <res...@te...> wrote: > Except that I've never heard as much dissatisfaction against Adobe as I have > against Microsoft. And Photoshop does what it does for good reason, whereas > Word has a degree of a tendency to not. As I sent my e-mail with the intention to stop this discussion on the spot, I did not read past the first paragraph, nor will I read followups. There is plenty of distaste for Adobe around, but that's irrelevant. This is about Free software; there's no "good reason" for Photoshop to do "what it does." Even more importantly, this is about open standard, which are absolutely critical to embrace. It really doesn't matter what software you use, or what its authors' business practices are. If you created this .psd with software created by starving Gambian orphan cripples, as their only means of survival, we'd still criticize it. -s. |
From: Matthew K. <kel...@po...> - 2004-08-27 22:13:47
|
On Fri, 2004-08-27 at 15:07, Telcontar wrote: > However, I have not thus far encountered any programs that have direct and > complete Photoshop support My girlfriend uses the Gimp on my Linux laptop as well as her Windows XP desktop do make skins/outfits/whatnot for The Sims and The Sims2 on her website (Sims2 is vaporware, I know, don't get me started.... "Why are you making skins for a game that doesn't exist?"). We're not talking about cute little stick-figures here- These are full-blown 3D skins akin to what you get in various FPS games like Doom3/UnrealTournament200x/etc. She has Photoshop installed on the Windows box too... And moves between them as needed as there is something that Photoshop does that the Gimp doesn't (embossing or something like that). If I haven't shamed you into at least TRYING the Gimp, I don't know what will. :) All that said, I like Photoshop too. I like Gimp better, though. -- Matthew Keller signat-url: http://mattwork.potsdam.edu/signat-url/ "No one ever says, 'I can't read that ASCII E-mail you sent me.'" |
From: Rob F. <ga...@ro...> - 2004-09-01 16:59:35
|
Sean, Thank you for this response. This is the kind of response that I had hoped for initially. Sean Egan wrote: >To keep this from getting *too* out of hand, attached is the logo that >started this thread in .xcf format. > >Trying to send us a Photoshop file is akin to trying to send us a Word >document. It doesn't go over well on a Free software mailing list. >The .PNGs, of course, are perfectly acceptible, but if someone would >prefer the flexibility to modify it of a Photoshop document, they can >use this .xcf. >-s. > > |
From: Sean E. <sea...@gm...> - 2004-08-27 16:00:28
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:32:34 +0100, Telcontar <res...@te...> wrote: > I have had a go at reworking the Gaim login/about logo with higher-quality > graphics and the modern "AIM man" appearance. That's nice; but how about a completely revamped logo? Brand new? None of this two Gaim-guys throwing envelopes at each other business. Any takers? -s. |
From: Steven G. <ste...@si...> - 2004-08-27 16:31:00
|
Sean Egan wrote: > That's nice; but how about a completely revamped logo? Brand new? > None of this two Gaim-guys throwing envelopes at each other business. > > Any takers? That'd be nice. I wish I had more time to get involved right now, but I'm all tied up in Mozilla/Firefox stuff. I've made a post on my website (frequented by logo/icon types) about it: http://actsofvolition.com/archives/2004/august/thegaimproject Steven Garrity |
From: Steven G. <ste...@si...> - 2004-08-27 16:08:40
|
Telcontar wrote: > I have had a go at reworking the Gaim login/about logo with higher-quality > graphics and the modern "AIM man" appearance. A page with a PNG copy, a > downloadable copy of the master PSD file and editing notes is here: > > <http://telcontar.net/store/temp/Gaimlogo/> > > Perfectionists (including whoever was responsible for the current "AIM man" > icon) may wish to take the image and make some improvements. > > Hope it is of use to you. Looks a bit better, yeah. There's a patch in the tracker that makes some cosmetic improvements to the login window that I'd like to see implemented: http://sf.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=910807&group_id=235&atid=300235 Here's a screenshot of the results of the patch: http://worksintheory.org/files/gaim/loginwin.png Steven Garrity |
From: Telcontar <res...@te...> - 2004-08-27 17:10:06
|
> Here's a screenshot of the results of the patch: > http://worksintheory.org/files/gaim/loginwin.png Actually, my reaction to that is what I'd rather see is a "master" login option, that when selected will log in ALL accounts at the same time. At present, the only options are to either quit the entire program to log out and reload it with auto-login set on each account to log all accounts back in (and use the history plugin to see what was being discussed when you signed off) or use the Account window to manually sign all the accounts on and off. If you sign out of Gaim, you can't have it sign all the accounts back in again at the same time. Selecting an item from the login window only logs that account in, and not all the rest. |
From: gabor <ga...@z1...> - 2004-08-27 17:41:58
|
On Fri, 2004-08-27 at 18:09 +0100, Telcontar wrote: > > Here's a screenshot of the results of the patch: > > http://worksintheory.org/files/gaim/loginwin.png > > Actually, my reaction to that is what I'd rather see is a "master" login > option, that when selected will log in ALL accounts at the same time. > > At present, the only options are to either quit the entire program to log > out and reload it with auto-login set on each account to log all accounts > back in (and use the history plugin to see what was being discussed when you > signed off) or use the Account window to manually sign all the accounts on > and off. > > If you sign out of Gaim, you can't have it sign all the accounts back in > again at the same time. Selecting an item from the login window only logs > that account in, and not all the rest. if you middle-click on the sign-on button, it will log in all the accounts (well, it seems all those which are autologin-enabled). gabor |
From: Wim De S. <fra...@yu...> - 2004-08-27 17:50:12
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:09:52 +0100 Telcontar <res...@te...> wrote: > > Here's a screenshot of the results of the patch: > > http://worksintheory.org/files/gaim/loginwin.png > > Actually, my reaction to that is what I'd rather see is a "master" > login option, that when selected will log in ALL accounts at the same > time. > > At present, the only options are to either quit the entire program to > log out and reload it with auto-login set on each account to log all > accounts back in (and use the history plugin to see what was being > discussed when you signed off) or use the Account window to manually > sign all the accounts on and off. > > If you sign out of Gaim, you can't have it sign all the accounts back > in again at the same time. Selecting an item from the login window > only logs that account in, and not all the rest. > I think you could use that window altogether and just skip to the accounts window or something, like other IM programs do. Why? I recently had a friend who tried gaim (without my knowledge though) and he didn't even get past that screen. Found it too confusing. I had the same experience with some other people. They might be a bit dim or something but dim people use gaim too. :-) greets, Wim (who's so going to get flamed for this one) |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2004-08-27 18:03:31
|
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 07:49:49PM +0200, Wim De Smet wrote: > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:09:52 +0100 > Telcontar <res...@te...> wrote: > > > Here's a screenshot of the results of the patch: > > > http://worksintheory.org/files/gaim/loginwin.png > > > > I think you could use that window altogether and just skip to the > accounts window or something, like other IM programs do. > > Why? I recently had a friend who tried gaim (without my knowledge > though) and he didn't even get past that screen. Found it too confusing. > I had the same experience with some other people. They might be a bit > dim or something but dim people use gaim too. :-) try gaim -a and yes, i would like the login window to go away, entirely. if there isn't a ~/.gaim/accounts.xml we should probly start to some version of the account add window, otherwise to something more along the lines of the account editor, but with buttons for sign on all prefs. luke > > greets, > Wim (who's so going to get flamed for this one) |
From: Dave W. <ka...@un...> - 2004-08-28 02:02:12
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Luke Schierer wrote: > and yes, i would like the login window to go away, entirely. if there > isn't a ~/.gaim/accounts.xml we should probly start to some version of > the account add window, otherwise to something more along the lines of > the account editor, but with buttons for sign on all prefs. Ok, so I want to start this small and possibly build it out from there. I've had an idea for managing accounts that I want to throw out and flesh out more. What if we added a group called 'Accounts' or 'My Accounts' to the buddy list. In this group, all of the 'buddies' in this group represent an account and can be added and deleted much like buddies. Like buddies as well, each icon would reflect the status of the account it represents. Differences however are that buddies cannot be dragged into this group or out of this group; 'show offline buddies' for this group would always be True; buddies other than accounts cannot be added to the group and do not show up in the group list when it is built; there would be a special context menu containing: 'Status' 'Sign on' ( should only be shown when the account is signed off? ) 'Sign off' ( should only be shown when the account is signed on? ) 'Edit Account' and then the rest of the items that are currently in the 'account actions' menu on a per-protocol/per-account basis. For the group, it should also have a special context menu: 'Sign on all' 'Sign off all' I don't know how feasible this next is, but it would be interesting as part of that group menu and behavior, it would be nice to be able to select multiple accounts in the list and then choose 'Sign in selected' or 'Sign out selected' advantages: - "solves" our status issue to where people cannot see their own status unless they put themselves in their buddy list - IMO, it will be possible to get rid of the login window this way (by also adding a first-run druid if no .gaim dir is found or specified) - We will be able to remove the accounts window, making accounts more prominent - Allows sign-on/sign off of one or multiple accounts from the main interface rather than having to open another dialog to manipulate status Disadvantages: - May be confusing because the main actions are not clear, they're hidden behind the right click menu. - May be confusing because the group would look like a normal set of buddies, however the context menus and behavior would be slightly different - Might annoy the short-buddy-list fans by adding more stuff to their list that can't (and IMO shouldn't be) hidden. - May be technically difficult grafting another node into the buddy list tree that's not a set of buddies. Any ideas about this idea or how we can make it better? I'd like to get a good handle on how this would work and what the Right Way(tm) to approach this would be and add this into part of the status rewrite. Thanks, --dw |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2004-08-27 20:13:44
|
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 12:52:20PM -0700, Dave West wrote: > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Luke Schierer wrote: > >and yes, i would like the login window to go away, entirely. if there <snip> > > What if we added a group called 'Accounts' or 'My Accounts' to the buddy I was thinking about this earlier today actually. its a tempting ui, it might be more intutive if we separated it from the buddy list more strongly, and perhaps collapsable/hidable. not exactly sure here, my ideas are rather nebulous. > list. In this group, all of the 'buddies' in this group represent an > account and can be added and deleted much like buddies. Like > buddies as well, each icon would reflect the status of the > account it represents. > > Differences however are that buddies cannot be dragged into this group or > out > of this group; 'show offline buddies' for this group would always be True; > buddies other than accounts cannot be added to the group and do not show > up in the group list when it is built; there would be a special context > menu containing: > > 'Status' > 'Sign on' ( should only be shown when the account is signed off ) > 'Sign off' ( should only be shown when the account is signed on ) > 'Edit Account' > > and then the rest of the items that are currently in the 'account actions' > menu on a per-protocol/per-account basis. sounds good. > > For the group, it should also have a special context menu: > > 'Sign on all' 'sign on auto' as well. > 'Sign off all' > > I don't know how feasible this next is, but it would be interesting as > part of that group menu and behavior, it would be nice to be able to > select multiple accounts in the list and then choose 'Sign in selected' or > 'Sign out selected' > probly not easy. and not something you want to even think about proceeding with before some of the other developers give their thoughts. > > advantages: > > - "solves" our status issue to where people cannot see their own status > unless they put themselves in their buddy list > - IMO, it will be possible to get rid of the login window this way (by > also adding a first-run druid if no .gaim dir is found or specified) agreed. > - We will be able to remove the accounts window, making accounts > more prominent > - Allows sign-on/sign off of one or multiple accounts from the main > interface rather than having to open another dialog to manipulate status > > Disadvantages: > > - May be confusing because the main actions are not clear, they're hidden > behind the right click menu. - Confusing because the group would look like a normal set of buddies, however the context menus and behavior would be slightly different - Would annoy the short-buddy-list fans by adding more stuff to their list > that can't (and IMO shouldn't be) hidden. i think that hiding it might be a valid option, perhaps if it was a resizable section instead of just another group... > - May be technically difficult grafting another node into the buddy list > tree that's not a set of buddies. - Will slow down signing on a subset of accounts: its faster to click some entries in the account editor than it is to right click on a series of buddies. again, making it a separate tree could solve this by allowing multiple selection. multiple selection woudl still have the same basic menu structure, but would have to be adjusted for the account action type stuff. > > > Any ideas about this idea or how we can make it better? I'd like to get a > good handle on how this would work and what the Right Way(tm) to approach > this would be and add this into part of the status rewrite. > > Thanks, > --dw > > |
From: alexd <tro...@bl...> - 2004-08-28 07:22:05
|
On Fri, 2004-08-27 at 12:52 -0700, Dave West wrote: > Any ideas about this idea or how we can make it better? I'd like to get a > good handle on how this would work and what the Right Way(tm) to approach > this would be and add this into part of the status rewrite. You could have two tabs on the buddy list, one tab with all the current online buddies, and one tab that shows all the accounts and their associated on- and off-line buddies, with an icon for each account. Perhaps in this second tab, you could have a further list of 'buddies': all the ones that are currently blocked, but obviously only if the user has chosen to block a specific list of buddies. alexd -- ale.cx |
From: Rob F. <ga...@ro...> - 2004-09-01 16:59:54
|
>You could have two tabs on the buddy list, one tab with all the current >online buddies, and one tab that shows all the accounts and their >associated on- and off-line buddies, with an icon for each account. >Perhaps in this second tab, you could have a further list of 'buddies': >all the ones that are currently blocked, but obviously only if the user >has chosen to block a specific list of buddies. > > But we just got away from a two-tabbed interface.... |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2004-09-01 17:35:11
|
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 12:51:05PM -0400, Rob Flynn wrote: > > >You could have two tabs on the buddy list, one tab with all the current > >online buddies, and one tab that shows all the accounts and their > >associated on- and off-line buddies, with an icon for each account. > >Perhaps in this second tab, you could have a further list of 'buddies': > >all the ones that are currently blocked, but obviously only if the user > >has chosen to block a specific list of buddies. > > > > > But we just got away from a two-tabbed interface.... 22 versions or1 year 4 months and 28 days ago ;-) luke |
From: Mark D. <ma...@ki...> - 2004-08-29 16:01:29
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:52:20 -0700 (PDT), Dave West wrote > What if we added a group called 'Accounts' or 'My Accounts' to the buddy > list. In this group, all of the 'buddies' in this group represent an > account and can be added and deleted much like buddies. Like > buddies as well, each icon would reflect the status of the > account it represents. Luke said I should respond to this, so here I am! I'm not a big fan of combining the buddy list and account editor idea. I think the buddy list should be a list of buddies, and trying to make it do too much will detract from its comprehensibility. I think we'd be much better off with a simple dropdown box near the top of the buddy list and shows the state of each of your accounts in a simple, un-editable fashion. But hey, that's just me. -Mark |
From: Daniel Westermann-C. <da...@ac...> - 2004-08-29 16:18:54
|
On 2004-08-29 11:01:12 -0500, Mark Doliner wrote: > Luke said I should respond to this, so here I am! I'm not a big fan > of combining the buddy list and account editor idea. I think the > buddy list should be a list of buddies, and trying to make it do too > much will detract from its comprehensibility. I think we'd be much > better off with a simple dropdown box near the top of the buddy list > and shows the state of each of your accounts in a simple, un-editable > fashion. But hey, that's just me. > -Mark A dropdown near the top of the buddy list would imply (to me) that selecting an entry would somehow affect the buddy list. My intuition suggests that choosing my Jabber account would maybe only show the buddies for that account on the list. This probably isn't the intention, but I think the presence of the dropdown would be a little confusing. I like Luke's idea of separating it from the buddy list using a horizontal divider that can be moved up and down. -- Daniel Westermann-Clark |
From: John B. S. <joh...@gm...> - 2004-08-27 18:00:25
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 18:09:52 +0100, Telcontar <res...@te...> wrote: > > Here's a screenshot of the results of the patch: > > http://worksintheory.org/files/gaim/loginwin.png > > Actually, my reaction to that is what I'd rather see is a "master" login > option, that when selected will log in ALL accounts at the same time. > > At present, the only options are to either quit the entire program to log > out and reload it with auto-login set on each account to log all accounts > back in (and use the history plugin to see what was being discussed when you > signed off) or use the Account window to manually sign all the accounts on > and off. > > If you sign out of Gaim, you can't have it sign all the accounts back in > again at the same time. Selecting an item from the login window only logs > that account in, and not all the rest. > Undocumented feature - middle-click on the "Login" button - this logs in all the 'auto-login' accounts. And on the matter of the graphics, I'm really disheartened by the treatment here - I was afraid this might happen. Daniel is a diehard Mac user that I've discussed a bunch of Gaim and open source things with, and possibly started to use Gaim just to shut me up ;). He saw something he thought could be improved, and I recommened he post it to the list, and this is the reaction he got. Not nice :(. In the end, you've got a PNG that seems a good deal cleaner than the existing PNG, so the net result is one open format file in lieu of another. Perhaps instead of complaining about the fact that the working file is in a format that can't be as freely manipulated, work should be directed at getting the Gimp to support it. *That* would benefit everyone. John |