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.
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?
The titling sucks beyond description. It's just ugly. Sorry, I like the GIMP, but this doesn't do it justice.
It looks like some kind of rusty dial off the Titanic... only it's measuring.. years... which maxes out at.... 30.
Umm...
What?
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...
I was hoping to see a splash screen that said, "Now Featuring 16-bit Color!"
Evil is the money of root.
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.
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
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
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?
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.
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!
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."
)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
Have you read the gimp man-page, in particular the part about splash images? http://gimp.org/man/gimp.html#SPLASH
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
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.