Slashdot Mirror
A Gimp In Photoshop's Clothing
comforteagle writes "Scott Moschella, from Attack of the Show!, set out to make The Gimp a little friendlier with a simple UI make-over, creating GimpShop. Despite an outcry from some developers, users have picked it up with passion. Howard Wen has interviewed Scott about why he did this. From the interview: 'I've always thought that GIMP was just as powerful as Photoshop. My way of proving it was to make GIMP work as close to Photoshop as I possibly could, given my limited programming experience.' As more Windows/Mac users discover powerful open source applications are they bound (slashdot disc.) to make more discoveries of this kind?" Update: 09/16 18:48 GMT by Z : Some users have pointed out this is basically an update to a previous discussion we've had. Link added for the sake of completeness.
I love gimp but I always felt that the interface was a little strange. I am glad that somebody is looking into making using the gimp a little more user friendly. However I don't think ripping off PhotoShop is the best way to do that as I'm not super fond of the PhotoShop interface either.
My way of proving it was to make GIMP work as close to Photoshop as I possibly could, given my limited programming experience.
/passes out
With Photoshop weighing in at over a thousand dollars Canadian, let me just say that anything that resembles it moderately, without the strange behaviour of PaintShop, is welcomed. Free too?
It's funny because I can remember thinking about this the other day, and wondering when companies are going to start investing in the future of office systems, to help reduce their own long-term bottom line. If everyone donates $100 to the Gimp/Gimpshop project(s), just imagine the money saving that would come out of it! I would be willing to bet that if this happened, in less than five years open source would outpace Adobe in quality and reliability. The reason most people use Photoshop is for quality and reliability -- not necessarily features as you might expect. It does what I need better than anything else yet, but with some time, effort and financial backing, we'll see superior products come out of the open source community.
Open source needs a well of cash to draw from. I suggest a foundation be made to fund open source projects better than we've seen. Apply and they bankroll your project if you've got something hot. I'd like to see that work on a large scale and I often wonder why SourceForge doesn't take that approach, in favour of small donations to each project on a case-by-case level. I'd love to apply for financing for my crazy open source ideas! It's the money factor that slows me down. I don't have time to pursue it very well because I have to pay bills.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
The only reason I don't use the gimp is because I can't be bothered to learn a new interface. I keep hitting Photoshop's shortcut keys expecting them to work and its frustrating not knowing where all of the menu & tool bar items are.
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
To borrow a quote from elsewhere: "If you build it, they will come."
One of Adobe's Lawyers (from their Barrel O' Lawyers): Your Honor, in the defendent's own words:
Judge: I have no recourse other than to find for the plaintiff and wreak all sorts of havoc with Open Source Development.A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Having grown up, in the figurative sense, with Photoshop the interface for The Gimp has always driven me crazy. I can't imagine I'm the only one either. Maybe this will help more people make the switch.
On what you call friendly. I'm sure some people out there would prefer a graphics editor without a GUI.
Powerful open source applications? Have you tried doing anything in GIMP on a Macintosh? It will only run through Apple's X11.app, and it makes a 386 running Windows XP look fast. I was so disappointed by the performance I bought Photoshop Elements for Mac on eBay (it only cost me $30 though... well worth the price.)
Ok, I admit, when I first started using the gimp I had just come over from Photoshop, so it was a little wierd. The UI was, in short, different. But I've been using it more and more in recent times, and as I've gotten into it, I find it to be much more intuitive than Photoshop's interface. At least for me. I like the shortcuts, I like the right clicking menus, I like the multiple windows, etc... Everytime I go back to Photoshop (because I'm forced to, not because I want to) I find more reasons to like the gimp.
-=JML=-
I've only used the GIMP on occasion because it was a bit awkward. I was used to the photoshop-esque look and feel. As soon as I heard about this I uninstalled photoshop (to remove all temptation) and am going to install the GIMP with this tonight. I'm excited to try it out.
Generation Trance: What generation are you?
Gimp is a powerful tool, and has a wealth of features (in many respects overshadowing Photoshop itself).
But, it has a clunky interface (at least to my eyes), and requires more work to perform many tasks. The win32 versions I've used have always been buggy (I have to save often, and have lost countless hours of work due to Gimp crashes). And it is loaded with a number of features I wish it didn't waste my navigation with (like that cute little image-stamper tool).
I think one strength of Gimp is it's freedom to experiment with interfaces, so in that light I'd rather the core version didn't try to emulate Photoshop... rather concentrating on trying to be something different and potentially better.
But aside from that, the changes I see this guy putting out are making me pitch a tent.
Do not confuse "Freedom of Choice" with "Free Will".
Free too? /passes out
I'd figure someone as old as you (uid 56!!) would know that it's "/me passes out"...
I don't get it, why does it seem so many alt-os projects are forever trying to emulate the look and feel of a Windows environment?
Linspire, KDE, GIMP, and others, if you spent the time improving, not cloning, your application, perhaps you'd get more users.
I mean really, if your app is going to look, feel, and function, like a Windows one, why should I use yours??
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
AFAIK there was only one developer who showed he was a little dismayed. Also, GIMPShop only makes the GIMP a little friendlier to those who are used to the unfriendly interface of Photoshop.
Undoubtedly someone here will bitch about how The GIMP has none of the important features that Photoshop has. So in an attempt to get some useful information out of such rants, please be specific as to what Photoshop can do that The GIMP cannot. Name individual features and capabilities.
Wow, way to pimp out your own website when you could have just direct linked to the Paint.NET Website.
Anybody that's been using Corel PHOTOPaint for a while will tell you that it has an option in viewing preferences to make it look like photoshop... IDENTICAL to photoshop actually - including buttons, tool groups, and even context menus.
It would be a great idea to implement this kind of functionality as a xml template, where non-programmers can create templates that mimic similar applications. This is not only handy for the Gimp, but also OpenOffice. On-the-fly-switching would be even better. Microsoft Word used to have a 'compatibility mode' back when WordPerfect still ruled.
nyud.net mirror, mirrordot mirror. article seems to be down for me.
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/0 3/31/231227
On one hand, it feels like something of a defeat when free software has to mimic paid software, right down to the application name itself.
On the other hand, as a fairly heavy user of various image-manipulation and art programs, I've always felt that The Gimp's UI was a little too out there for mainstream appeal. I see attempts to improve usability as generally a good thing, as it's really the only stumbling block that still exists for many users to adopt free software. I don't think that it's possible to overestimate the value of a positive user experience.
Andrew Lenahan http://www.starblind.com/
Adobe is going to have lots of fun with this. Have you not seen the spalsh screen? They probably have a patent for the letter J and the color blue... but they certainly have patents covering most of their UI. And they tell you outright what their patents are... so you have no excuse. This is pretty lame. Go write a better UI; don't copy Adobe.
Only zealots should be complaining over this - especially since you can still use the Classic GIMP Interface if you wish.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
If you use every single feature and lots of optimizations, and maybe even hack the code yourself, you might be upset at the GUI overlay.
... and press it ... and ... see nothing happened.
But, if like most people, you just want to use it and not struggle with things, it works fine.
Kind of like how MSFT noticed a lot of people were using WordPad or NotePad because Word had too many darned features that people got lost and they only wanted to write a short note, so they stopped fighting that and stopped making the menus way way too complex.
Most people don't use everything. I've got buttons in my car I've never pressed, for example.
Like this one here marked "Auto Eject". Now, to the casual user you'd think it was one of those James Bond things and if you pressed it you would be ejected from the car, but I know better since they'd never let something like that in a basic sports coupe, so I'll just lean over here
[explosion]
[seat ejects]
[seat crashes in pond]
[bubbles appear after poster drowns since he foolishly had his seatbelt on and couldn't get it off after submersion]
.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
To me, the show-stoppers for using Linux/Gimp for my photo work are the following:
* Color management. Not aware of ICC color profiling. Can I calibrate my monitor with nVideo and ATI Linux drivers? Can Gimp load an ICC profile of my output device to proof my print?
* Multi-processor support. Photoshop takes advantage of my dual-core machine.
* Large files. Photoshop loads and processes 1 GB image files much faster than Gimp. With my 4x5" large-format camera and a 2400dpi film scanner, my image files are 100 megapixels.
Unfortunately for me, since what I know about graphics design could be inserted into the eye of a gnat without causing it to blink, I'm still just as screwed as I was before. :)
Does it run on Linux?
If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough. (Alan Kay)
Does this make it PIMP???
So, don't fall asleep, type "gimpshop windows" into a Google search box and go get it...
Oh well, what the hell...
yes, that's about gimpshop
no, it's not about this interview
For those not aware, you can change the shortcuts in gimp to whatever you want. Some people have already made the photoshop shortcuts for you. So all you have to do is download the gimp-photoshop shortcut file and you're set.
cl
Reply . . . let's get it over with.
If someone has time to spare, please consider addressing this user interface request. There are dozens of duplicates but no one seems to have time to implement it.
Tomorrow: The return of the Look & Feel Lawsuit.
Stay tuned.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
To many many many users, this interface is "better" because they're just used to it. Stupid? Yes. Just remember most people are extremely confused if you switch their windows bar to the top of the screen, they will panick and get lost. That's how it is. You can switch them to Dvorak too, it's better. The Good Thing it to have the choice between a powerfull interface and a conservative one. If this can bring TheGimp into mainstream use, this is good.
\u262D = \u5350
in order of popularity?
FTA: "For people out there who are looking to get a Photoshop-like experience without pirating or purchasing Photoshop..."
I only use the Gimp for any graphics work I'm doing, which is usualy limited to web design. I think it is actualy a far more powerfull tool than photoshop, however it has its problems. Instead of waisting time on the looks of the UI I think there are two or three basic things which would make the Gimp more apealing. First and formost are the crashes, I mean come on some times I only get 20 or 30 minutes of work in and it crashes. Second, and this seems to mainly be an issue for Mac Gimp users, is the fact if you try to click on anything outside your current window you first have to make the windows active. So if I want to click on the blur tool I have to click once to make the tool bar active, a second time to select the tool, a third time to make the canvas active and then I can use the tool, of course if the keyboard is handy I can always use short cuts, but... Lastly is I wish they would make a native aqua interface instead of using the X server, this is a very small gripe however.
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
When the GIMP has:
1) CMYK support;
2) Channel math;
3) Industry standard color engine and ICC profile support;
4) Channel mixer;
5) Equal control over color adjustment modes
and a bunch of other shit, then the GIMP will be as powerful as Photoshop. Until then, it's a silly statement to make. While 50% of the people who use Photoshop can very probably do the exact same things with the GIMP, for the 50% who really push Photoshop there is no substitute. And, as you climb higher on that curve to the people who are really stretching Photoshop on a daily basis (mainly very high level retouchers/digital artists) it is quite literally the only tool for the job.
This is one of those time I think open source cheerleading is not a good thing. Just because it's an open source digital image editing program doesn't mean it's the same thing as Adobe's flagship product.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
Am I hallucinating or did that GIMP icon on the slashdot page just twitch its eyes? creepy, that dog thing is watching me...
Hmm... so now GIMP has a photoshop-like interface. Sounds good, because where it is right now, only a CLI could be worse.
The gimp pretty much pisses all over the gnome HIG. I think it is very difficult to use for newbies and/or people used to use photoshop. They seem to completelly ignore all we know about usability and human computer interfaces.
This development and the reaction that people are having to it can be a wake up call for the gimp developers. They may realize their interface could use some work. Kind of like KDE is reacting now that GNOME is doing so well on usability. In my mind, this should benefits the gimp
I really hope they take a constructive attitude towards this one and take a look at why people are liking this.
This is old news. Everyone on OSX has moved on to using Seashore which is the GIMP is a nice slick OSX package, native Aqua/OSX windows, and overall just a better program. Check it out.
Not only are the Linux alternatives free of charge, but you've got to build a "bridge" to get the HUGE established base of Windows users to cross over. The "best" products don't always win out in the marketplace. (You know, the old Betamax vs. VHS tape debate and so forth.)
When you have people out there who spent many hundreds of dollars on training courses and the like for Photoshop, they're generally *not* going to see the value in an alternative product that has a drastically different GUI. It makes a LOT of sense to "re-engineer" the power in GIMP so the controls look and feel like the dominant product in the marketplace for the same tasks.
For all the slamming of the Windows interface and look/feel of most popular Windows apps - I personally feel that they've done a lot of things right in that area. It's far from perfect, but these days, most of my Windows-related complaints have a lot more to do with the underlying infrastructure and it's inherent weaknesses (virus and spyware problems, tendency to have multiple, concentrated "points of failure" such as XP's WMI database or the system registry, etc.). Even Mac OS X, which looks teriffic, feels a bit "weak" to me in the area of file management. (It's very touchy about exactly where the mouse needs to be in order to start a list of files and folders scrolling up or down inside a window, for one example. Quite frustrating.)
Perhaps copying Windows in a product like Linspire just makes more sense than trying to "re-invent the wheel" in an attempt to achieve some "holy grail" of UI elegance and efficiency?
It's been a few months since I've seen this on Slashdot (please correct me if this isn't the same gimp-photoshop hack).
Despite an outcry from some developers, users have picked it up with passion.
As I recall, the developers were upset because of the way he went about makeing Gimp look like Photoshop. Rather than making changes to the data files that are used to create the menus, he changed to programing itself. This (going by memory) broke foreign language support. As I recall, Scott wrote the Gimp team and sent his suggestions. The Gimp team wrote back and invited him to join a discustion group. However, Scott decided to fork Gimp and make the changes himself. This of course leaves maintenance up to Scott. I hope he's up to it.
Request a Linux Shockwave player here: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/
Hey, this has absolutely helped out!! My mother (63 years old) had been using Photoshop for about ten years under Windows. In wanting to upgrade her from XP to Linux, I decided I needed to get her used to her main app - Photoshop - or the alternative, GIMP. I had her use GIMP for awhile, but she quickly was frustrated. After seeing GIMPShop, I loaded it on for her and she's been a happy Linux camper ever since. No more virus or spyware issues for her.
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
How do you get a +5 Off topic?
-PMP-
defaults write com.apple.x11 wm_click_through -bool true
for the novice at least...
Gimp's interface sucks because the windows are always misplaced, the tools options are all different sizes so they don't fit naturally in any group. So it's always messy, with tools in different positions on the screen, etc.
Photoshop sucks because the floating palettes are always overtop of some part of the image you want to see and they are a pain to re-arrange. It also sucks because it basically takes over the whole screen to be usable, so you can do nothing else at the same time or have to keep switching back and forth.
I'm posted this before on the Firefox article, but it really deserves repeating that Inkscape's UI is really, really good and is what the gimp should be modelled after, not photoshop. Editing SVG is far more complicated, but the inkscape UI is simple, takes up almost no space, and is easy to use. Maybe it wouldn't be good for serious graphic artists, but at least for new users and casual use a gimp that looked like that would be much better than either photoshop or the current gimp ui.
Theres nothing like the smell of a GUI patent infringment case in the morning!
First, the only people that find Photoshop easy to work with are those that make a living using it. As a newby to PS, I find it counter intuitive and a lot of things just don't make sense for doing quick simple graphics, like for software development. I fight with the software more then being productive at it, and I don't want to spend 24x7 learning how to use it. I really thing that if you need a book to learn how to use software, the software has failed.
When I first tried GIMP, I found that they were trying to duplicate PS whole "floating islands" approach to applications, an approach I despise. I can't stand a bunch of floating windows covering the content I am trying to create. I prefer Windows docking tool/dialog boxes. I like ONE window that contains everything else, when you resize or move the application, everything else moves with it, not remains to clutter the desktop.
Anyways, I don't see making GIMP like PS a step in the right direction. It makes sense to appeal to the PS crowd and make it a potential alternative to the expensive CS suite of tools, but if your tring to make GIMP more mainstream and adopt newbie and amateur users, then please look more like a Corel product rather then Adobe.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
While I think it's a worthy idea, it doesn't really look all that different (yet?). There's a main window that serves mainly as a backdrop, with a only handful of menus, none of which relate to an image you're editing (for example, the contents of the File menu are: Exit). Tasks related to images are still in the image window itself, and the more general tasks are still in the toolbar window.
How dare you make OSS usable by normal people? If you do that, normal people might start using and then it will become widely used and even popular and that would be SO un-cool.
Keep OSS like it is: by programmers who like to read 1MB man file and memorize obscure commands to use counterintuitive interfaces, for programmers who like to read 1MB man file and memorize obscure commands to use counterintuitive interfaces.
Some of the reactions:
I'd enjoy trying it out on some XP workstations, but I'd prefer a no-installer for easier removal.
Is there a package like this?
Like this one here marked "Auto Eject"...
[explosion]
This is a common mistake made mostly by geeks who install after-market high-end audio equipment and accidentally crosswire their CD/DVD player controls to the car's security system. As with everything in life, KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING FIRST!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Then stop calling it GIMP, or especially "the gimp."
Cutesy "recursive" names are bad enough, but using what most people would call a derisive term is inviting ridicule, and hence being dismissed by corporations.
Call it GMP, for Graphical Manipulation Program
Call it IMP, for Image manipulation Program
Call it MMP for Multimedia Manipulation Program (who cares if it doesnt actually do what its name says.)
But for God's sake, get rid of "the GIMP".
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
Can The GIMP draw Happy Fun Ball [trying to stay on-topic and failing]?
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
The hompage referenced by Freshmeat appears to have been bombarded from orbit... but there's a windows installer here: GIMPshot.exe
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
Haha...and to think, in his Sophmore year when I was his roommate in 301 Allen, he barely used the computer.
I'm not sure if that's cause I was on it All.The.Time., or if all the chicks from downstairs and gthe guys next door used our room as the communal lounge :)
Hey Scott, if you read these, drop me a line sometime...
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
You know, years ago, I pointed out in another Slashdot thread that serious graphic artists will generally not consider GIMP as long as it fails to support CMYK - or, for that matter, Pantone and Lab color. Mostly, I got grumpy, "well, how do you know?" responses from people who obviously don't know or work with graphic artists. Nevertheless, I reiterate: if you get paid to do graphic design, you're probably going to have to make something that gets printed eventually. RGB sucks for this, which is why other color modes are critical.
none.
Our "computer programs law" explicitly excludes "similarity from a preexisting program functionality" from copyright protection, and our patents law explicitly excludes computer programs, methods and algorithms, from patent protection.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
A little recognition that users matter would go a long way. I'd be willing to try alternative skins on top of GIMP.
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
Friendlier, not friendlier - I dont care...
As long as there is no duotone support (and there probably never be one as it is patented) The Gimp is useless for me.. as to many people who does serious pre-print work.
Would it be more accurate to say that I removed my illegal, pirated version of Photoshop now that I have GimpShop?
Makes more sense than saying I threw away my $800 legal copy of Photoshop now that I have GimpShop for free.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
settled out of court, IIRC.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
My problem with GIMP is that I've never been able to find how to adjust a rectangular selection after I've made it. In PS it's easy to move the rectangle, or drag any side or corner. Where does GIMP hide this?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I'll admit that probably had more to do with the fact that I was running a live CD than a real install, but that's a horrible way to give someone a first impression of your OS.
I agree. Ubuntu LiveCD is known to be much slower than other LiveCDs. See LiveCD Boot Benchmarks: Round 1, Popular LiveCDs:I would recommend Knoppix or Kanotix (both use KDE). There are some LiveCDs with GNOME so check distrowatch.com for more info.
You are precisely right. Gimp not only lacks CMYK ability, it lacks the ability to do ANY calibrated color workflow. This is absolutely crucial for professional markets.
There are some people who do nothing but correct color calibrations all day long. I know because that used to be my job at a service bureau, the job is called "color separator." A color separator tends to spend half his day converting RGB files to CMYK, and the other half of the day explaining to customers why their jobs were all fucked up and did not print the way they expected because they designed in RGB and the printer used CMYK.
Photoshop absolutely rules the professional market because it has the most comprehensive abilities for color control, it can work in and convert between different color profiles and color spaces. It would take YEARS of full-time effort from a whole crew of programmers, and extensive research with professional prepress users to come even close to providing this level of color ability. But instead, the Gimp programmers are rearranging the GUI. This is what happens when programmers are in control of the software, nobody is listening to customers in pro markets about what features they need.
Here is a link to the complaints mentioned in the article. Apparently the lead developer of the Gimp didn't agree with a fork that would lead to a "terrible waste" of resources. Near the end, though, he seems to leave a door open for those changes to be contributed back to some degree.
diegoT
His rationale is that people who are accustomed to Photoshop user interfaces can learn GIMP faster this way. Having never seen or worked with Photoshop myself (yes, I am a rarity), I've had no problem learning how to use GIMP at all (evidence: see the graphics I've created for my website, Sun and Fun), so it is all novelty to me.
Sun and Fun
Generally I really don't mind the Gimp interface, and actually I use it all the time for little jobs, mostly under Linux but sometimes under Windows.
The main thing that I would change if I ever, you know... got around to taking the time to actually try it, is I would make the tool window "stick" to the side of the active image window. Or at least have it "always on top". I find it annoying when the tool window drops behind the image I'm working on. Other than that, no complaints.
Dunno if this kind of "sticky" behaviour is really feasible with current window managers.. I guess I'm thinking of something along the lines of a docking window, something that docks to the side of the the image window instead of being a seperate window. Hey why not even have one for each image window, make it collapsable so it doesn't always get in the way.
The guy should have copied the fw UI - it is light years ahead of Photoshop. Acutally I think that was the reasoning behind adobe takeing over macromedia, plain, simple, jealousy hahahahahahahaha!
I'm an artist who paints a lot digitally. I tried to learn GIMPshop but there's too many thresholds. The interface could be slimmer, and some tools could be faster (I'm talking to YOU size 200 airbrush).
Here's a comparison of the interfaces: PS5.5 - GIMPshop
The load dialog crashed in the background and I don't even have everything open like in PS. GIMPshop is okay for basic image manipulation I guess; the functionality is certainly there, but the painting workflow isn't.
The Chair Corp. comic(*00-12)
"gimp" means beautiful or attractive, and has meant that for far longer than it's been used as slang for the handicapped. Presumably the makers of an image manipulation program had that meaning in mind.
Yes and a swastika is a harmless religious symbol and it has been for longer than it has been a symbol of hate. But, it doesn't get used by the general public or big business a whole lot these days because language is a part of culture and so it changes as the people and culture do.
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
What kind of sense does that make?
Windows was modelled after Lisa. Does everyone use Lisa, or successors?
UI isn't the biggest reason to choose one piece of software over another.
Ridiculous post. Worse because the point about GIMP is fails due to the fact the Photoshop-alike version is an alternative, for people who like the Photoshop UI.
Come on mods!
The industry standard is Photoshop. You can choose to emulate the interface that everyone uses or you can choose to be locked out faster than a CBC employee.
Note to OpenOffice/StarOffice evangelists: this is also why your apps will never be mainstream.
Yeah, right.
Are you kidding?
Of COURSE the mentally retarded won't be offended by the name "The GIMP".
They're simply too dumb to get the insult. They require the assistance of the inane to be offended.
Leave them alone (both the GIMP developers and the gimps themselves), and let them either code or compete in the Special Olympics.
Try watching "Mind of Mencia" for a clue.
Yeah, that'll happen right after Broderbund sues Adobe for infringing on "Print Shop"...
such a witty bon mot! both the GIMP developers and the gimps! sir, your talents are truly wasted here on /.
Fucktard; have you ever worked with people who have any kind of mental illness or retardation? I have, and they are fully capable of working in the community and leading 'normal' lives, complete with fulling jobs and hobbies (maybe even playing with photoshop, who knows?)
But hey, don't let reality get in the way of your dismissive bon mots. Fire away, by all means.
Isn't this is a dupe? http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/0 3/31/231227&tid=152&tid=156
I would like to use The Gimp, and I try to when I can, but the interface drives me batshit. Yes, I know that this is because I have been brainwashed into thinking like an Adobe-bot(tm), but that's what I had to work with for years.
If the Gimp people don't care about trying to get current Photoshop users to use their app, then it really doesn't matter. However, if they want people to actually switch, they need to make the interface at least tolerable for people who have been working in a particular way for years. I'd like to use the new tools, but this isn't like The Gimp is radically new tech where you'd suck up the learning curve and get over it... it's a graphics editor. I'm not going to re-invent my workflow just to use it.
I don't care if the layout is better for X-Windows due to focus over mouse, I don't want 5 different windows on my screen which disappear on me - never to be found again - if I click on a bigger window which overlays these little PITA utility windows. If you are going to make a Windows port, then make a port that actually is usable under Windows, or don't waste your time with it. Heck, I don't even think this setup is incredibly more efficent even under X, now that I mention it. I'm no huge fan of MDI, but there are times where it makes some sense. Or just maybe, the Gimp people can think of something better than MDI that still allows me to find these windows when I need them.
C'mon, real men use vim or emacs to retouch photos.
Wimps!
here's an idea, why don't all the OSS projects out there convert their GUIs to use the Mozilla Foundation's XUL engine? Then the GUI would be completely customizable without so much as a recompile, and you could d/l gui's particular to whatever your favorite workflow is, and switch between them like themes. An easily changable GUI would also allow for much quicker innovation for alot of these kinds of GUI issues that irk people so much..
You've a point: you'd have to be pretty slow to enjoy "Mind of Mencia"...
Many of the differences in GIMP's UI don't appear to be designed to give some advantage -- they seem to take a different approach for no particular reason, and much of it seems like a kludge (to me, anyway).
Why not follow Photoshop's lead if there's no real disadvantage to doing so?
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Or at least I call it a "tiled" interface, I don't know what, if any, official name for this is. Certainly the vast majority of programs use this style of interface, espeically MFC ones. Modern MSWord is an obvious example, but if you assumme the attached menubar at the top of a Windows or Linux program is a toolbar (which it is) then even very old programs are tiled. All the tools are neatly placed along the edges of the windows with a rectangular area in the middle for the actual image. In some cases the tools can be moved around by dragging them, but they will "snap" to a new position so the window remains tiled and all the regions are still rectangles.
One big confusion is a LOT of people call this "MDI" which it isn't. "MDI" means the toolbars are shared by several documents, which either tile or overlap in that center rectangular area. This is pretty much proven to be a bad idea and I believe is just a holdover from Windows3 or so where it was done as a trick to limit the need to swap in programs that were not being used just to update exposed background areas. In a "tiled" window a new document gets it's own toolbars. Modern MSWord does this by default, so does virtually every other program I have seen except IDE's.
The big problem with "tiled" is that the tools are very constrained in what shape they will be. Often some weird things have to be done so that the information can be presented in a fixed-width and very narrow rectangle. More importantly nobody has figured out any easy way to let the user resize them and thus varible-sized displays are impossible and have to be relegated to popup modal dialog boxes. Another problem with tiled is that you usually cannot use the full screen area for your document as the program either cannot hide the toolbars or is unusable without some visible.
The alternative, which was used by almost all X11 and Macintosh applications until Windows95 started doing tiled/MDI is "floating" tools. These are normal windows that can be moved around using the exact same mechanism as the main document, and can be resized. The big defect is that they obscure parts of your document and the user usually has to move them around to reproduce a fake tiled layout just to see it.
Also due to a horrible bad, bad, bug in Windows and modern X11 window managers, where clicking a window raises it without any way for the program to stop it, you are unable to use the same tools for multiple documents, thus defeating a very important advantage of floating windows. I suspect a lot of Gimp's problems was that the designers were hoping this bug would be fixed, but it is getting worse every year with each new window manager.
Zed: Bring out the Gimp.
Maynard: But the Gimp's sleeping.
Zed: Well, I guess you're gonna have to go wake him up now, won't you?
So hack it. It's not a huge hack to replace the splash screen and all instances of "gimp" with "GNU IMP".
Loose lips lose spit.
Maybe you can purchase such an interface with money you get from the ATM Machine using your PIN Number.
Unfortunately most GUI apps are poorly designed such that the front-end and back-end code are tangled together. If programmers would create the back-end as a discrete entity GUI apps would be much more flexible and stable.
One thing I really hate is when you load a big file and the entire interface freezes while the file loads. Argh! ICQ always did that on my contact list. Horribly coded.
There is no reason why a well designed app shouldn't be portable to different UI's ranging from text based on up. Why not have a text-based version of GIMP or OpenOffice that lets you manipulate the files using command-line commands? Functionality should not be based on the UI.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Put the "innovative" interfaces in "Development" "UI Experiment" or "Whistler-type" builds.
The GIMP interface is a nightmare. It's one you can learn to deal with, but if you want to get in there and *DO WORK*, it's best if you get the crap outta the way.
Bad menus are Bad menus.
Unintutive entries ruin workflow. It's not about Photoshop vs Originality, it's about usability. If you want to erect (ha ha, I said erect) some exclusive "We Like the Kludgy GIMP Interface" club and whine about the perceived whining from Semi-Professional graphics people, go ahead. You'll only be disappointed by projects like these, and people like me who will include these sorts of features in their F/OSS distributions..
Whoa, antivirus tools in GIMPShop sure sounds like bloat to me!!
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
An extra $100 is an extra few hours a developer can spend adding a feature or polishing the program. Most commonly used commercial apps could be developed for less than $500,000 of developer time and many smaller apps even for under $50,000. For a $200 (retail price) program it doesn't take many user's donating to earn back that cost. 50,000 users donating $10 each could pretty easily pay for a replacement to the $500+ PhotoShop suite.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Glad to see I'm not the only one who noticed this.
Thumbs up!
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
Interface does count, and the interface has to match the intended audience.
For the core OSS audience of unix/linux geeks and programmers, the GIMP's current UI is great. All shortcuts and right clicks. For the average computer user (the type that mostly uses wordprocessing, a web browser, and IM) the GIMP UI is too complex. For them, a more Photoshop-ish interface (although I feel Photoshop could stand a lot of UI improvements) is much better.
Personally, I'm fine with GIMP as it is, although for the two "average users" I've installed GIMP for (on Windows), they've gone and downloaded PaintShop or ACDSEE instead of learning it. I'd definitely give them this interface.
I think GIMP would be wise to integrate this sort of UI as a "UI skin" where one got this by default, but an advanced user can choose to use the more complex UI (i.e. as a prompt on the first launch). Sort of a more elaborate version of the existing GIMP shortcut file.
I don't use GIMP for my photography work for one reason alone and it's not UI: GIMP's RAW support is terrible (as in non-existent by default). I've downloaded and successfully installed the open source RAW component, but you can only do rudimentary adjustments with it.
I'm the maintainer for the Arch Linux AUR package for this. You can find the relevent things over here: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gimpshop/gimpsho p
The GIMP UI is designed to work best with Linux-style hover-focus on the mouse. In Windows, it's frustrating, with the right focusing though, it's speedy.
Pardon me for butting in here, but when somebody's getting all Princess Di about their righteous work with the disabled, you don't really expect to see them calling somebody a "fucktard" in the same paragraph. It has something of a detrimental effect on your credibility. Y'know?
Read Sven's posts in the link you provided to find out why he is concerned that GIMPShop is a step backwards for the whole GIMP project. He is worried that GIMPshop will confuse the little bit of momentum GIMP proper has been recieving lately in the form of Books, tutorials, press and other contributions by hundreds of people. He wants Scott to join the team, not diffuse the focus. It's clear Scott can not properly handle the magnitude of the fork on his own and will have no choice but to create a parallel and incompatible branch if GIMP. Horrible indeed!
From the parent link Sven says:
"[...] Changing menus in GIMP is not something that should be taken easily. It affects the user manual, tutorials and breaks all translations. Any change here affects the work of dozens of contributors. Still, I have always encouraged people to help to improve the menus. Bill has lately asked for volunteers to form a small team that is working on a proposal for changes to the menu structure and menu labels. That is a very welcomed effort and I hope that we can incorporate these changes soon. I have asked Scott to join this effort instead of working on this on his own. What else can I do?"
Kind Regards
"A few great minds are enough to endow humanity with monstrous power, but a few great hearts are not enough to make us w
The point being that ALL (or almost all) GUI apps should be perfectly usable from the command-line. Why, for example, isn't it easy to enter a command on the command-line to tll Firefox to open a page and print it to PDF without ever opening the GUI? That'd be a great ability since Firefox actually renders html w/ css correctly unlike most html to pdf converters. ;)
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
(2) Customers of Large Company begin noticing that this group of hippies and commies are cranking out free Stealth Bombers. Customers salivate with desire.
(3) Customer plops into Stealth Bomber cockpit and immediately squalls like a wet-diapered baby because the controls for the Stealth Bomber aren't the same handle-bars and pedals he had on his tricycle.
We're going to have to go through this over *every* *single* Linux program, individually, one at a time, aren't we? I might as well put this in my sig: Stealth Bombers are more difficult to use than tricycles BECAUSE THEY CAN FLY.
Not to keep you all in suspense a moment longer: Bash is more difficult to learn than DOS, Emacs is more difficult to use than Microsoft Word, installing Linux is more difficult than keeping Windows pre-installed, LinCity is more difficult to play than SimCity, Angband is more difficult than Rogue...pick any random Linux program. Pick the equivalent Microsoft program. THEY WORK DIFFERENTLY! Know why? BECAUSE THEY'RE DIFFERENT!!!
But then I realized you where probably being sincere. I agree that OSS development can be a little sticky at times, but Gimp or Gnome in general as an example is pretty unfair. They've made themselves pretty clear in that they are developing for themselves and not very open to the opinions from the masses. Such is their right, although I don't agree with it.
But there are lots of examples that work the other way, KDE continues to both involve their users and (not surprisingly) improve. Projects like Mozilla have revolutionized the way we view browsers. Even this project, even while being derided, is a perfect example of how good the OSS model really can be.
Gnome developers have seemed to remain in the old-school of OSS development.
Quack, quack.
I have never used the GIMP, I have used GIMPshop since I started messing around with GIMP so I don't know how it compares. The reason I use it is that I don't see a lot of jobs where knowledge of the GIMP is a requirement, but plenty where knowledge of Photoshop is. I used Photoshop at school the other day for the first time, and I was able to use it without too much adjustment.
-Wolf
I think you 50/50 split on these sorts of tools are totally fictious. The only way that this might be true is that 50% of the PURCHASED copies. photoshop is possibly one of the most widely pirated programs after word 4 windows.
Strictly speaking, you could think of Firefox as a frontend to the rendering engine Gecko — I think it'd be pretty well possible to write a system based on Gecko that does what you want :)
Very true. I've asked for them to make a stand-alone version that could process data but I guess nobody that'd know enough about Gecko ever saw that request or saw it as important enough to bother with. It's on my list of todo projects but as big as my list is I doubt I'll get to it anytime soon. ;)
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Fair enough :)
i really like this new project ... but let me explain before you interpret this wrongly:
i'm semi-professional photographer and my need for an image processing application are not the same as for an artist in digital arts. i do not play with filters and all the cool features that are available.
in the last ~5 years, i tried almost every software for image processing around. at university i have access to photoshop. with ms windows i used to use corel photopaint and i'm gimp user since the early days.
an easy UI helps doing things more quickly saving you time for the creative parts of photography and image processing. on the other hand, i found out that you can get used to different UI's quickly, if you really have to use the app as an essential tool in some creative work you do at the moment. of course, if you try working for days with photopaint and then want to do the same tasks in gimp, you are lost in the first 10 minutes searching for menus where features are.
depending on HOW you use the image processing applications, you can like/dislike it's UI or not. if you are a newbie in image processing or you were restricted to only ms windows or only mac UI's, you have some deficits and switching UI's is not easy for you. the others from you, who are faced from time to time with other widgets and UI's (qt, gtk, swing, ...) have it easier to switch.
sooner or later, you even learn to use all this different UI's without problem switching from one to the other... like knowing to type dvorak and qwerty with same speed ;-) ... the reason lies in the plasticity of our brain and the capacity of learning - we are more intelligent than computers, right?
of course, people may come with the argument that they hate different UI's and only like . my reply to this is easy: if you are serious with image processing, you do not spend hours playing with UI's but after using the one you have atm installed for some work you do, believe me, you will automatically learn where the features and options are hidden of this app. once you are forced to work with photoshop after working with gimp a long time, if you are just someone who wants to play with some photos taken on last holidays, you may argue about UI's and hate the one or other UI. if you want to do image processing, you do not care what UI you use if the process and result are the same.
i really like the gimp UI, because every image has it's own menu, the widgets are gtk2 and can be teared appart. you can have separate menus in separate windows and so on...
on the other hand, i use nip2 for tasks that are not possible with gimp. it has a completely different UI but also this UI has its advantages.
for converting or resizing images, i would suggest all of you to use the command line, as it is much easier than any UI available (imagemagick)
am i telling that photoshop or photopaint have a bad UI? no, not at all. their UI's are also very much usable. so what is it i want to explain here? for subject i have choosen "i like gimpshop", so that's what i want to explain.
photoshop, photopaint and other closed source image processing apps you have to pay for to have them. if you want to use them, you have to learn their UI. paying for it, you are also motivated to get along with the UI to use also all their features. as newbie in image processing, you spent some money and now you want to get a long with it. you begin to like the UI. - you write history in your mind in this field learning this UI.
gimp, nips2, imagemagick and others that are opensource, have the advantage, that their UI can be addapted to the person who knows how to modify them. gimpshop is exactly one such approach. the community of photoshop users who wants to use gimp has now a nice approach to have photoshop behaviour in gimp.
i myself will probably never use gimpshop. as told, i like gimp as it i
OSS is not a private party for nerds. It's an answer to computing in society when confronted with poorly implemented and priced proprietary offerings. It's not a hangout for beards and ponytails. And "dumbed down"??? Well, put your geek money where your mouth is and you go write adjustment layers into the Gimp. I fucking dare you.
We're all just peachy happy that you find the Gimp to be just to your liking. But, news flash, it wasn't written just for you or your Secret Beer Club. It was, despite a recent hysterical need by some to claim no such thing, written as a direct response to Photoshop, a program whose price put it out of the reach of most users.
So OSS isn't for this guy or the original poster? He shouldn't expect accommodation for a good user experience and usability by the developers? (yet you then go on to talk about Script-Fu which is exactly such a thing) Well, that's the developer's goal: to make a product the end-user can use and use well.
OSS isn't a locked room where you can hang out and talk about TOPS20 and point and laugh at the Windows users out in the snow. It's about extending the room, unlocking the door, and bringing everyone into the warm room so that we can ALL have good user experience with computing.
To paraphrase you, 'Keep in mind that the whole reason anybody even cares about Photoshop is that it does what it does well.' And the Gimp doesn't do it quite so well [yet]. The idea is to change the latter to be like the former. Not bitch at people who want that to happen... which won't win you lots of friends either.
- I am made of meat.
... it opens a ton of windows on the desktop. I thought it was the linux crowed who started to moan about how browsers should be tabbed - well that extends to everything! That's one of the reasons I've never given it more than a couple of seconds test. Sorry but you are out. So the only thing I love about the Gimp at the moment is their little mascot. He's really cute :)
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Am I the only one that doesn't mind the current Gimp interface? Admittedly it was a bit strange at first but thats only because I had previously used Photoshop's interface.
My karma dropped from "excellent" to "good" for about five hours yesterday. It's back up to "excellent" today. Ooh, that tickled, do it again! I *love* the attention!