Slashdot Mirror
A First Look At The GIMP 2.0
An anonymous reader writes "Brice Burgess has given everyone a good peek at what's coming in 2.0 for the GIMP in his review over on NewsForge. Don't like the old UI? It's gone. All new. There have also been megawumpus improvements in the text tool. Brice says he sees some room for improvement still, but overall he is "very impressed."" (Slashdot and NewsForge are both part of OSDN.) The new text tools are a big step up, though the interface as a whole remains a love-it-or-hate-it thing.
Looking at the pictures, the old GUI is hardly "gone". It's changed a little bit, and they've added docking capability. Great.
Great tool, but the GUI makes it difficult to find things, IMO. I was hoping for something more from a "new" GUI.
So, does it finally have mouse pointers like Photoshop, that are the size of the currently selected brush so that you can actually see how big an area you are affecting?
Will this release have a compatible gimp-print plugin?
I see they didn't go with an MDI-style interface. Having independently floating windows makes GIMP practically unuseable, unless it's the only program running... [grumble]
It's close enough to photoshop that instead of spending the time to crack it, i'll just use gimp instead.
It's helping people stay legal.
http://use.perl.org
You're not just flamebait, you're a troll. Of course there's R&D...it's just at the user-developer end. There's plugins that do things nobody wants to spend the time to implement in Photoshop.
The core system does a lot, but the real usefulness of the GIMP (at least for professional folks) lies in that they can write up a perl script to accomplish any damn thing they can think of. Of course, you can write C plugins as well.
You can't do that so easily with Photoshop unless you've already invested the time and money to make it common practice. (Which, sadly, a lot of firms do. It's easier to commit to trudging an extra couple of miles in familiar territory than risk learning something new.)
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Indeed, I've been using a 2.0 pre-release for awhile, and the improvement is cosmetic mostly. The dockable tool windows are great, but a functional MDI would be much more useful. Why? Window management is fine on linux with virtual desktops (one of mine is dedicated to gimp), but (a) it doesn't really work if you need GIMP on windows, which even with virtual desktops added has clumsy window management, and (b) more importantly, it is impossible to have windows automatically and intelligently resize themselves "around" the toolbars. MDI can do this easily and well, I and see no reason for this constant MDI-phobia (or is it SDI elitism?). Apps like Kdevelop have already proven that MDI can be done well, and the GIMP's SDI is the first complaint I get from people who might consider switching from Photoshop.
I view the Gimp as a very extensible, flexible program.
That being said, it's completely unusable for long periods of time by a guy who, admittedly, is NOT a graphic artist.
I use graphics programs like secretaries use computers. I want it to do what I want it to do, I don't want to know why, I don't want to know when, and I sure as hell don't want to have to spend a half hour figuring out HOW to do something. Ever tried to do something like a inner bevel in Gimp? I'm sure it can be done, but for the life of me I can't figure it out. And that, to me, is a failure of the program for users such as myself.
Maybe you graphics types find it just fine, but it certainly doesn't work for us reg'ler folks.
Blog,Twitter
I don't understand why anyone would want a box covering the very thing they're working on. Is there some option to make it that way, or customize it - say 'Adobe 7' or 'Corel 4.5' profiles?
I use Photoshop more than 10 hours a day - if Gimp wants users, it should make it easy for Photoshop users to migrate with as little adjustment as possible. Why would I want to throw my years of PS experience away? Adjustment is necessary, but not full-blown re-education.
is the "Healing Brush".. That's my single favorite part of Photoshop; especially when touching up family photos from a digital camera.
No, the GIMP still is not a Photoshop killer, the CMYK support is still in its infancy, no where near ready for use in pre-press. I am watching it eagerly, as my boss is more concerned about what we spend than the work we get done... *sigh*...
I can use it for web stuff (color precision doesn't matter), but for pre-press we cannot get away from Photoshop... beyond CMYK and ColorSync support, paths, clipping, masking, and RAW support is not up to par.
I have never looked at some software as killer of other one. Right question is: is it good enough for me and my needs? I think that Gimp is good enough for lot of people who work with graphics. Photoshop is nice piece of software, but is it necessary that everyone pay for features that won't use anyway. If you really need it, and don't have OSS alternative, then pay for it. Not before.
/ss
...is buggy.
I routinely switch between a single monitor (think notebook) and multiple monitors (think notebook with nice big monitor at work). When I'm only using the single, Photoshop often leaves certain dialogue boxes on the non-existant monitor. The effect is that the app is broken until the next time I'm at work.
I'm pretty careful, now, about where I use and leave dialogue boxes, but it still happens. The "Reset palette locations" command works for palettes, but not for dialogue boxes. Adobe confirms that this is a known bug; I can only hope they'll fix it in the next release. Otherwise, I loooooove Photoshop. Cheers!
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Agreed. The Gimp's greatest flaw is it's interface. And from the screenshots it doesn't look like it's improved much. If the interface is as flexible as they claim, they really should do some interface-templates. When you start the Gimp, it should ask whether you want the UI to look like Photoshop, MSPaint, or Paint Shop Pro, and set things up accordingly. Then Users could define their own templates to improve the UI over time. That should solve all the interface problems.
I have also been annoyed by all the taskbar entries (as others have already commented). There's really no excuse for opening so many windows.
I'm not a coder, but I have to say that I'm surprised that Gimp hasn't split off/forked into more projects. If I were a talented coder, it seems like these interface problems could be fixed relatively easily?
I am running Gimp 2 beta and it still needs Adjustment Layers like Photoshop.
Adjustment Layers allow adjustments to be made to all layers underneath on a separate and changeable adjustment layer.
Don't like your first choice for "color levels", just select the layer and change it.
Want to change the text layer that was part of an image you just "color leveled", just change the text layer.
In Gimp these adjustments are lossy and final, in Photoshop they don't have to be.
When will Gimp support the awesome "healing brush" that Photoshop has?
After discovering Photoshops new "healing brush" for touching up photographs I will never be able to go back to just the clone tool.
The healing brush clones, makes the clone match the color characteristics of the surrounding pixels, and blends the clone with the surrounding pixels.
A 20 minute job can be done in 3 or 4 minutes.
Ranting how crappy Gimp is compared to [fill in comercial product here] is just as unfitting as stating that Gimp is about as good as PS.
I'm a mulimediadesinger and have worked with a wide range of tool on a professional level.
Gimp 1.3 actually _is_ a usefull tool. It's not the tool of choice for most things, but in some scenarios it can actually deliver results were other grafics tools get in their own way with feature and algorithim bloat.
The habit of putting every thing in it's own window made pre-1.3 Gimp absolutely unbearable for production. Unless you had Fluxbox, maybe.
But the simple level Anti-Aliasig and some other nice features along with the one or other workaroud trick make Gimp a nice Pixeleditor to work with. Praise the Gimp team for getting the message and introducing tabs and other must-haves for GUI work.
On top of that, - and this is one of the most notable things of this OSS project imho - as long as I can remember, Gimp has allways been an absolute breeze to install. I wish all OSS would install that way. For instance, right now I'm debugging a default Postgres/ODBC Setup and it's taken up 30 workhours allready with no end in sight...
To me the undo stack in Gimp 2.0 looks promising, as it hints in the direction of the PS protokoll. Which, btw, proves that PS is still waaaaay ahead of any competition, be it comercial or OSS.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to Gimp 2. Cudos to the Gimp team for their good work.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Okay, y'all, I know I'm ringing in on this late, and it's 6:00am without any sleep for me, so I might come off as brusque. Everybody says "I'm not a graphic designer, but..." Well, I actually am a graphic designer.
The GIMP may, someday, be as good as Photoshop. Right now, it's not even close. Photoshop's interface is so polished and so wise, and its tools are so powerful but easily accessible, that all of these debates about the GIMP are frivolous. I've used both extensively, and for anything other than fucking around, there's no comparison.
I will pay $600 for a program as powerful as Photoshop. But, I'd really like to have Photoshop (without the use of CrossoverOffice) run on my Linux desktop machine. I can boot into Windows or I can walk to my Win98 box to run Photoshop, but it's frustrating not to have Photoshop accessible when I'm doing other sorts of serious work.
What I think graphic designers who want to use Linux should do is lobby Adobe to make PS available on Linux. I would pay, and I know others who would, too.
Online citizen journalism from the inner city: The View From The Ground