Slashdot Mirror
GIMP 10th Anniversary Splash Contest Winner Announced
ghost_crab writes "Following up on this story, the winner for the 10th Anniversary GIMP Splash Contest has been announced. Concurrently, a birthday edition has been released to the mirrors. Many happy returns, Wilbur!"
"Gimp Splash 10". That sounds like a movie you don't want your girlfriend finding under your couch.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
... the bitching about Gimp being 10 years old and not being up to the par with Photoshop...
I thought I was seeing things.
"We are collecting images with tutorials... "
"Unfortunately the winning entry wasn't accompanied with a tutorial..."
The top lettering ruins the image, it looks like a homepage logo from 1998. I would remove the text at the top, crop the gauge tighter and overlay a more subtle version number in the bottom right. What does everyone else think?
love the gauge! don't like the fonts & look of the title...
"And the winner is...
a GIF screencap of that dude from Pulp Fiction.
Congratulations, Hamid Franklin on a job well done. *clap-clap-clap*"
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
The titling sucks beyond description. It's just ugly. Sorry, I like the GIMP, but this doesn't do it justice.
2005 was a bad year for alot of things.
It looks like some kind of rusty dial off the Titanic... only it's measuring.. years... which maxes out at.... 30.
Umm...
What?
To start gimp without the splashscreen, simply write: gimp --no-splash
Is it only me, or the gauge suggests how long the GIMP project will last? ;)
Always put off dealing with time-wasting morons. If you would like to know how... I'll get back to you
coral cache directly to the winning image:l ash-contest+ixyx_v0.2b.png
s t+ixyx_v0.2b.png
http://sven.gimp.org.nyud.net:8090/gimp-2.2.10-sp
and to the full page:
http://www.gimp.org.nyud.net:8090/contest/
i also put the image to here:
http://www.artichost.net/gimp-2.2.10-splash-conte
Pulsed Media Seedboxes
Why does it start at 0, get to 4 but mark it at 5? This also makes 15 not quite centred* at the top. (*I'm british)
To take part, you have to right click through menus, I suppose.
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
Rename the GIMP so that people who aren't already devoted to it might have a clue as to what it does.
There was another article a while ago about program names that made sense to me. If the Open Source programs had more recognizable names, they would have more traction. As it is, in my school, it is very difficult to get people to use things like the GIMP instead of Photoshop but much easier to convince them that OpenOffice is a good choice over MS Office.
Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
Sorry to see the contest ending. I was about to fire up Photoshop and make a cool logo for Gimp. Oh well, there's always the next contest.
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
The new splash screen image looks very nice but I wish it wasn't there at all. Am I the only person who finds splash screens irritating?
At least it is less annoying with a program like the GIMP. It's almost unbearable when programs that are convenient to have automatically started upon login flash their pointless splash screens around right when I want to start working on other stuff (Skype, I'm looking at you).
Another splash screen? We need that just as much as we need sarcasm detector.
Give me adjustment layers. I'm hooked on those in photoshop. Levels, curves, colour, contrast etc...
You're (probably) refering to this story. IMHO GIMP is a great name, or at least as good as Ps would be for Phostoshop. A more justified criticism would be directed against the GIMPs somewhat unintuitive GUI. Then, there are historical reasons to not do that...
But, as others have pointed out, with GIMP you have a choice: GIMPShop (which is still somewhat immature). For lazy readers:
Satisfied?
I like the background dial image, but does anyone else think the type looks ugly? It doesn't really blend in with the background very well, IMO.
...splashdotted?
I was hoping to see a splash screen that said, "Now Featuring 16-bit Color!"
Evil is the money of root.
You're right. A seven layer 600x580 image should be that huge.
We regularly create 3000x3000 pixel images (10" square at 300dpi) with many more layers than that. Of course we use PhotoShop for that. The GIMP just isn't ready for prime-time yet. The sad thing is that it's 10 years old now. If it isn't anywhere close to ready yet, is there any hope that it ever will be?
terrible font, and puke green background? Ugh! What did these guys make this with; Photoshop?
You should try gimp 2.2. Working with large images bigger than the screen is supposed to be much much faster in gimp than in photoshop. Where you would be waiting around for photoshop to be completing simple things like color adjustment or say something else like levels in a large image gimp would complete it in seconds.
After 10 years GIMP still sux and this horrible splash reveal that no one with decent skill use it. Open source is great, when programmers make software that only programmers will use.
I've long been an advocate of dynamic slashes. The slash should be fetched over the internet. There should be a default splash for no connection. Then the slash can change like the Google images for special happenings.
Often mechanical guages are "pinned" (the needle rests on a pin) at the low reading otherwise they vibrate badly. Hence the needle doesn't travel between 0 and 1.
Da ZombieEngineer
I'm not trolling, I love Free Software and have a soft spot for the GIMP especially, but this says a lot about the user base.
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
Who are they kidding?
No wait.... There is "Auto White Balance", which might as well read "No White Balance" because the [i]whole point[/i] of a white-balance tool is to point-out what part of the image is to be considered "white". (Either that, or to indicate the color temp of the light source.)
This, and the fact they must ask for splashscreen art to be submitted to them, makes me wonder if the GIMP project isn't driven by artless hacks. If they had more professional contact with end-users (in formal product testing, for instance) they would have suitable artwork practically thrown onto their lap.
Sorry, I tried but I just can't use this thing.
After looking through the rejected submissions, they passed up some really strong designs for this crap. Amazing.
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
intents and purposes
Seven layer? Learn to count!
...having a GIMP 10th Anniversary Interface Redesign Contest?
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
> Seven layer? Learn to count!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7. See, seven! I assume the original poster wasn't counting the layers that weren't used. The ones used are the ones with the eye beside them in the layers dialog. Who needs to learn how to count?
(My apologies if you actually do see a different number of layers. I'm running 1.1 on a Mac. That's the newest version I've been able to get to work.)
I've always thought that the GIMP was the graphic tool of choice... for developers. I mean, think about it; it's open source! It runs on Linux! It does things comparable to Photoshop and has lots of cool-looking effects!
But then, when you actually try using it for something beyond simple trickery, you start seeing the problems involved. For one, even on Windows, it uses multiple windows for the same app. That doesn't make ANY sense from a UI perspective, and means that I often have to click more than four times in order to bring GIMP back up to focus when it's behind other Windows. Even when you get beyond the horrible UI design (GIMP developers: please, please put it in an MDI window; you have no idea how much this would help), there are major features missing that most people would want. Where's the one step photo fix? Colour balancing? How do I even draw a straight line? The interface certainly doesn't make this easy, and doesn't have any simple steps in order to do so. Admittedly these things are probably in the manual or a plugin somewhere, but they should be much easier to find if the GIMP wants to attract more users.
For me, it is nothing more than a curiosity at the moment that I cannot use for any real work, and that's kinda sad, as I'd love to have a good open source program for that sort of stuff.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Yeah, and when the dynamic splash server gets hax0red, you will get a nice goatse-themed splash screen. Probably it will happen when you are trying to demonstrate the professional quality of open-source software to your boss.
It does ruin the image. I like the dial image theme though. The dial alreadys says Gimp and points to 10. So, we don't need a title. Leave the actual version number and text in Gimp's Help About.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
But I could swear that I've seen this guage on photo.net....I'm pretty sure that the "artist" only added the gimp logo and text to a pre-existing image (And they did a bad job of it, too!)
Let's try not to let fact interfere with our speculation here, OK?
Clean, simple, relevant. Probably not enough wizardry for them though.. cgi?display=image&name=2005112609582421525m age&name=2005112609582421525
http://www.gimp.org.nyud.net:8090/contest/gallery
http://www.gimp.org/contest/gallery.cgi?display=i
Were that I say, pancakes?
It's true, it's recursive, and it may reduce the number of "it's not Photoshop" related complaints.
Wow, could it be any uglier? Let's see, blatant overuse of dropshadows - tick, shadows all from different light sources and directions - tick, minor versions numbers in large lettering on the top requiring a new splash screen for every damn update - tick, really ugly antialiasing on the gimp logo - tick, not to mention all the other issues everyone has already pointed out. And let's not go into the size of it, what is it with some programs acting like they're the only thing you'll ever run on your computer?
I'm not surprised this won, it's par for the course really.
The 'winner' is a piece of amatuerish crap of the worst kind.
:|
Try and sell GIMP to any serious graphic designer with an image like that and they'll laugh in your face - and when they've finished laughing, they'll either punch you in the face or wallop you with their handbag.
This image is the winner?
I'd love to see what the losers liked like
If you look at the competiton, you'll understand why the design won. It's actually not bad... It's just not corporate looking. And that's why it's actually likable.
GIMP is what happens when...
A bunch of geeks think they know something about graphic design and decide to make a program that will fullfill graphics designers' needs.
It's butt ugly, non-functional, un-intuative, mega-slow, feature-poor and generally crappy.
Flame away slash(b|d)otters, but I mean it, really.
GIMP is teh sucks!
Idiot mods!
but have no idea what a GIMP is other than a derogatory term for someone who can't walk well
Roger, really. People say I talk too much.
not Wilbur.
I know that this has been said over and over, but names mater - and GIMP puts people off. Strongly. I don't know why geeks don't get this. I have worked on products where the marketing teem has spent, literally, millions of dollars in market research and consulting fees to come up with a product name. This happens all the time. Product names evoke images/moods/whatever in potential users. A bad name can tarnish a product, even an excellent product... sometimes fatally. The name is actually attached to the product in users' minds just like th UI. It really matters.
Contrary to the previous Slashdot stroy, the name need not be descriptive to be effective (e.g. Firefox is a good name), but it doesn't hurt (Photoshop). The name should make people feel good about the product, and feel good about using the product - if it makes them feel uncomfortable, or worse, creepy, they aren't going to use it. They just aren't. They will actually avoid it. Clever, geeky, inside joke names rarely work. You and I may know what GIMP stands for (but is GNU Image Manipulation Program really much better?) but the rest of the world doesn't... and they probably do have some sense about "gimp" - and it's bad.
Geeks: please, please, think more about product names. If you want to move beyond just other geeks (in the case of GIMP photographers and graphic designers) you have to come up with names (and logos/splash screens) that appeal to more than just other geeks. You simply have to accept the fact that what geeks think is cool is not necessarily what the rest of the (potential) user community does. And these people are not "lusers" for not "getting it."
take out the out-of-style hovering lettering at the top ("the gimp 2.2.10"), take out the two rivots over the mascot's head, and put in odometer dials showing the version number, and some "version" label just above that. since the main (annoying) print of "the gimp" was removed, increase the size 1.5 to 2x on the plain "GIMP" that appears in the dial.
Start Running Better Polls
"GIMP - 8-bit paint Popular software for hobbyist photo editing, but criticized for its interface and lack of pro features Originally a student project at the University of California Berkeley, the GIMP website gave the impression of being led by founders Kimball and Mattis for years after they had left. The project was taken over by a group connected to the German Chaos Computer Club. Development was funded by the film industry from 1998 to 1999. Employed to add16-bit deep paint to GIMP, that development was abandoned in 2000 when the GIMP project announced the gegl vaporware. GIMP leadership is a Communist-style secret committee with no public leader. The developers list is a hostile shout-fest where using personal character attacks against dissenters is endorsed by the list "moderator"." :t ml
:
from
http://linuxmovies.movieeditor.com/odd.software.h
And the list of a REAL Linux software
http://linuxmovies.movieeditor.com/software.html
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
No wonder all the professionals still use Photoshop.
oi, my account didn't register and I'm ready for breakfast or you could all reconize me as roanmermaid.
looking at most the competition reminded me of Provo - everything else was just a dangerous and boring variations on the same theme. with a few exceptions. Its the only one that stands out as individual. kudos for doing something different. and isn't it sometimes the point of art to make people a tad uncomfortable, make them think?
I like the idea of the pressure gauge and that there is still a long ways to go. who cares about the text at the top. maybe the artist will change it if he feels like it.
it might be well to remember that caustic evaluation of the winner also implies the same contempt for the judges of the contest- you know, those wonderful people that make this software available to you.
the artist stirs me to the core of my womanly soul, something that all your petty, nerdy snarking has failed to do...... I think I'll go have a love child with the artist and name our daughter wilber10
Take a look at Open Source software on OS X. That software usually follows the UI guidelines of OSX. It does not take too much extra effort to provide an OS specific UI for each OS you are targeting and OS X provides great tools for keeping your UI and engine code separate in the form of Interface builder and the .nib files.
Why does GIMP rely on GTK and X-Windows? I don't call that proper cross platform development. You imposing too many prerequisites on the end users of the software. Either use Java exclusively or provide a native UI for each target platform. With the latter approach, you are more likely to end up with clean and highly portable code that you migrate to any future platform that may arise in the future.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
)1) The original XCF file has TWENTY SEVEN layers, a few of which are way, way bigger than the canvas. Twenty seven layers at 300dpi at TWICE the target image scale [last step was to scale down from 600x580 to the requested/suggested output scale of 300x290] is pretty ruttin' good if you ask me.
/. than there were submissions for the contest. Next time, everybody look busy!
3 66132offer for a love child. And here I thought there wasn't to be any http://www.redriderleglamps.com/Major Award beyond infamy and notoriety!
)2) The GIMP works. Perhaps it doesn't work the way you like, but it does work.
)3) And in response to the rest of everyone's warm, friendly, supportive, wholly typical slashdot slashcommentary: Honestly? I agree about the text at the top. I wasn't happy with it when I posted it, and I'm still not happy with it now. But the devs/judges were/are. And my skin != thin, so snark on, brothars and sistahmates. Snark on.
It is interesting to note that there are more complaints here on
)4) Lastly, I see that I have had an http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=172515&cid=14
GIMP doesn't rely on X Windows. It doesn't make any XLib calls but uses a highly portable abstraction layer called the GIMP toolkit (GTK+). GTK+ is currently being ported to Quartz and as soon as that port is finished it won't any longer require an X server to run on Mac OS X.
We are looking forward to your contributions that will help to integrate GIMP better with the Mac OS X desktop environment. Such patches are very much welcome.
Also, the color of the text and doggie image added to the dial do not match the original scal and numbers. The text is not a matching font, either.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
The hubris is absolutely breath-taking. So, you're the new CEO of Open Source? We await your considerable financial investment. PS actually, *I'm* the CEO of Open Source. I think they're doing a spectacular job. I tell them not to listen to you. Which is a good thing, because they're working to please people like me, not assholes like you.
What are intensive purposes? You mean intents and purposes.
http://developer.gimp.org/ Sign up and volunteer! I want to see EVERY SINGLE NAME in here that posted with a flame about the Gimp on the development team and working their asses off to patch in all the improvements they've so generously suggested. I await the products of your labor.
Announce those to be first-round winners, and open up the contest again. Jeez..
:P
What were the guidelines? Who were the judges?
A look back in time at splash screens of the past, and a held-up comparison of any potential winner should yield a firm "NAY" on all current entrants.
I'll submit one, and I won't cheat and use Photoshop for any of it..
OP was talking about the size of the file, it does not matter if the layers are visible or not. Removing invisible layers yields a filesize of 2.2MB with nine layers.
Naw.. Let's just ignore him, and pretend that the GIMP is serious competition for whatever professionals use...and don't forget to illegally download something, give the professionals a big middle finger, claim they're making too much, all just to complete the sales presentation.
It's a good thing they didn't pick the one cursed by sudden and inevitable impalement.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
No, I'm really bloody serious as hell. It's Open Source software; it belongs to you as much as it belongs to anybody else (no, I'm not on the team itself, wherever *that* came from). How do you think the developers on the project got there? Just like I showed you! I'm actually serious that the people who have nothing better to do than line up and gang-bang the Gimp can simply DOWNLOAD IT AND OWN IT THEMSELVES, as PER THE GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE! Then it's yours to change! How hard can it be to change the freakin' NAME that everybody has their panties in a bunch about? Download it! Change the names of the files! Recompile it! Release it! You're so fucking smart, I'm sure you'll be rich and famous! If it's too much trouble to do yourself, you have a hundred people in here who, from their posts, think exactly like you do! So why don't you do it? Please? PROVE to me that you're not just a bunch of sniveling bitches?!?!?!?!?
Working with large images bigger than the screen is supposed to be much much faster in gimp than in photoshop. ARE YOU KIDDING??? I was making an a3 sized 600dpi poster for my schoolwork. On gimp, the image would literally take 10 minutes to apply any kind of filter-like effect at all, text rendering was hideous and zooming in was so painful that I did the whole thing in the same zoom level (16% or so?) I finally got so irritated that I opened up photoshop 6 instead and finished the thing in less time that it took to save in gimp. gimp + large images? no thanks.
My Mommy says smoking kills. Oh, is your Mommy a doctor? No. A scientific researcher of some kind? No. Well then sh
You probably need to make sure your graphic card drivers are up to scratch.
If they are not high quality ones it will slow programs down, especially graphical ones.
Make sure that you have current new drivers for your card, and then try again. I think you'll be surprised at the speed increase over photoshop.
Having it at 16% zoom is not "bigger than the screen," the idea is that gimp does not redraw the whole thing at once if you only see a part of it.
... the point in question is the fact that photoshop was astronomically faster than gimp was at editing the same image on the same hardware at the same time. It's a relative test and if the graphics drivers are slowing down gimp, shouldn't they be slowing down photoshop more if gimp is "faster"? - I was lacking in ram at the time, but again it is the fact that gimp performed at such a horribly slower pace than photoshop did in the same circumstances that gets to me. I'm not a usual complainer and I would be all for gimp if it was to clean up the act a bit, but frankly in my opinion it sucked. Enough to stop me recommending it to people as a photoshop replacement and find some other alternative. (I now use fireworks as my main graphics software, and my old copy of photoshop when I really need to)
My Mommy says smoking kills. Oh, is your Mommy a doctor? No. A scientific researcher of some kind? No. Well then sh
...sorry? did that have any relevance at all? I think you have missed the point here mate I left it at 16% zoom because going any closer in resulted in a 5 minute redraw as each little section was ground out from the disk. Any significant change in the image resulted in no less. Photoshop did the same thing in fractional seconds.
My Mommy says smoking kills. Oh, is your Mommy a doctor? No. A scientific researcher of some kind? No. Well then sh
Yes you missed the whole damn point, GIMP divides the image in tiles, not on with the whole thing at once so things that are of screen would not be redrawn after each change. Anyway, I remember reading that this works badly on Windows, so you should compare PS to GIMP on it's native platform (unixlike).
Don't worry, the parent post you replied to is full of it. I have mailed the devs of gimp a few times over one of the issues I think you're describing. Large images require processing the ENTIRE memory space taken up by the image every time a preview is processed, and then again for the final acceptance of a change. This is a known issue they admitted to (all except for the zealot Carol who denied it is a problem and insisted photoshop is performing some trickery to make it seem quicker) and can't be fixed yet without a core rewrite, and that's not planned until 2.4 or 2.6, if that. At its worst, gimp on a mid range P4 does those things slower than an old PII/200 running photoshop, so it's certainly no 'trickery' by photoshop. Photoshop just has sane preview handling and relies upon its own graphics-specific VM to handle larger images.
It's a known and admitted problem to the gimp developers, and it'll be fixed eventually.
Also your "Tile cache size" is probably too low.