Slashdot Mirror


Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional 2nd Ed

r3lody writes "An extremely large amount of the information we get on a daily basis comes from what we see. Imagery is therefore very important to those who want to communicate with us. When computers had advanced enough to be able to process images in a digital fashion, the market opened up for programs that could manipulate them in many ways. While many professionals would opt for the paid programs, there is a free alternative: GIMP (Gnu Image Manipulation Program). The only stumbling block is learning how to use it properly. That is where Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional, Second Edition by Akkana Peck comes in." Read below for the rest of Ray's review. Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional, Second Edition author Akkana Peck pages 584 publisher Apress rating 8/10 reviewer Ray Lodato ISBN 1430210702 summary An easy-to-read, fairly complete introduction to image processing with GIMP I first attempted to use GIMP to fix a photograph or two of mine, but was quickly bogged down in the many options available in the program. That is why I was happy to get my hands on a copy of Beginning GIMP. The book is based mainly on GIMP 2.4, but the author included a preview of GIMP 2.6 in Appendix D. When I downloaded the latest verson of GIMP from gimp.org, I received GIMP 2.6.0. So I used the PortableApps version of GIMP (2.4.6) on Windows XP while reviewing the book and found only minor variations from the text.

One thing that strikes you as you open the book is the extensive use of color. Most texts are black-and-white throughout, but here you are presented with a pleasantly colorful tome. To follow the examples as best as I could, I downloaded the images available on the gimpbook.com web site. Although the images are supposed to be for the 2nd edition, several of those shown in the text for demonstrations purposes are not included. It appears that the images for the tools new to GIMP 2.4 are missing from the web site. This is surprising, since the 1st edition of the book covered version 2.4, so you would expect the images to be there.

The book begins by giving the reader a brief tour of the three main windows of GIMP: the Toolbox window, the Layer/Channels/Path/Undo window, and the Image window. Some basic navigation is presented, along with tear-off menus and how to modify tool placement. It concludes with a simple project layering a small image onto a larger one was given. Unfortunately, the files supplied from the web site did not include the PNG file used in the text, so it's difficult to reproduce the picture as shown. I later found the missing image in a GIMP-format file called wilber.xcf.gz. Unfortunately, xcf files are not discussed until the next chapter.

After the simple introduction, the author, Akkana Peck, gets into the most common adjustments a beginning user might need: re-sizing, cropping, rotating, brightening and darkening, and fixing red-eye. Each manipulation is presented with careful step-by-step instructions. I was able to match the pictures shown in the book, providing me with a level of comfort that I was learning the right way to fix photos.

One of the most common and useful methods of altering photographs uses the concept of layers. Layers act like cinematic cels, being mostly transparent with some opaque portions to lay on top of other layers. Chapter 3 gives a clear description of how to use layers to make changes. Two sample projects use layers to add text and another image to an existing photo, and to create an animated GIF using a series of layers for each frame of the animation. While I found minor differences between the text and the version of GIMP I used, I had no real problem understanding how the concept is applied.

You will probably need to do some freehand drawing from time to time, and chapter 4 covers the tools you'll need. While these tools are familiar to anyone who has used a basic painting program like Microsoft Paint, there are enough differences in how they are applied to warrant their own chapter. After creating some basic shapes (rectangle and circles), outlining and filling them, the author explores various fills and patterns. The chapter ends with a tutorial of creating a tree in a planter box, using just the drawing tools.

Every tool you use in GIMP works on the current selection. Knowing how to select just the parts of the image you want affected is important to getting the results you want. The author devotes an entire chapter to the numerous ways to select areas, add to or subtract from the selections, and fine-tuning them to only touch the parts you want touched. Basic rectangle, ellipse, and free-hand selections are followed by more sophisticated methods including the intelligent scissors and SIOX (Simple Interactive Object Extraction). The book also shows how to save selections as channels, so you can return to them in future editing sessions.

Sometimes, however, all you really need to do is a little touch-up on a photograph. Is someone's face in shadow or too much sun? Did you wish to get rid of some little irritating extra in a photo? Maybe you just wanted to draw attention to one subject and blur out the rest. Chapter 6 provides the information on how to make these basic adjustments. Darkroom techniques called dodging and burning provide minor adjustments to brightness, while cloning and healing can completely eradicate unwanted portions of the image. To draw attention to portions of the picture, you can enhance it using the blur and sharpen tools.

In addition to simple adjustments, GIMP offers a plethora of various tools to modify or create images. Under the Filters menu, you will find a large selection of tools. When I first looked, I felt that there were so many, who would need all of them? In the Filters and Effects chapter, Akkana Peck goes through them all, showing how they can be used to enhance your image. Because there are so many, she does not provide examples of each effect, but each one is described and you are encouraged to play. Remember, Undo is your friend here!

Chapter 8 delves into a very important aspect of your photos and drawings — the colors. First, the concepts of the RGB (Red-Green-Blue) and CMY (Cyan-Magenta-Yellow) colorspaces are described, followed by the HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value) space. A lot of time is used reviewing how these different colorspaces are used, and how they can be manipulated. The tools for breaking the image into its component layers, and demonstrations on how manipulating them can enhance your photo follow. The chapter concludes with some discussion on color profiles.

Now that you've learned quite a few niceties of GIMP, you need to learn more advanced techniques. The next two chapters go into more detail about drawing and compositing. The chapter on Advanced Drawing covers three main topics: mask and layer modes, realism using perspective and shading, and making new brushes, patterns and gradients. The Layer Mode section is the most interesting, showing how blending layers using various modes other than simple overlays can produce interesting effects. There are a number of examples, all easily followed and replicated. Once you've got a basic understanding of the advanced drawing techniques, it's time to put them to use on photographs. The chapter on Advanced Compositing shows how to use layer modes to play with images to improve their looks. You can brighten images, improve contrast, create eerie landscapes, fix noisy photos, and create panoramas, all using various layer modes. Many examples are shown, so you can get a good feel for the technique.

GIMP plug-ins provide automated tasks for the user. In fact, a number of GIMP's tools are provided by plug-ins. A variety of languages is supported. Plug-in scripts can be written in Scheme (the default — always installed), Python, and Perl (if available on your computer). If you need greater speed, you can write a plug-in in C. Chapter 11 uses the sphere plug-in as an example. Xtns — Misc — Sphere creates a sphere on a solid background. Akkana explains how to modify the script to provide a transparent background. A full discussion of the programming of the original script follows. Each step is carefully explained so only a minimal amount of programming background is needed to understand the concepts. Finally, examples in Python, Perl and C round out the chapter. Also included are explanations of how to find plug-ins and help on callable routines.

Unfortunately, there is so much to GIMP that one medium-sized book cannot contain it all. There is a potpourri of topics in the final chapter, including printing, scanning, setting preferences and the configuration files. The chapter ends with information on where to go for more help, source code, and images.

The appendices offer information on how to get and install GIMP, how to install it on older systems, and how to build it from source. Naturally, GIMP is always evolving, and Appendix D offers a list of enhancements in GIMP 2.6 that were not incorporated into the main text.

Over the course of reading the book, I had very little trouble reproducing the examples as demonstrated. I must admit that, despite the book's subtitle: From Novice to Professional, I am now at best an intermediate user. The depth of the capabilities available within GIMP is much deeper than the author could provide in the text. At almost 600 pages, this book is just about the right size, and provides the right amount of instruction for most people. The Additional Topics chapter provides information and links for further study and training, for those so inclined. If you are a beginner to image manipulation, and want to get fairly proficient with GIMP, then definitely get Beginning GIMP. It's not leaving my desk any time soon.

You can purchase Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional, Second Edition from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

232 comments

  1. Why use Gimp ? by ehack · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What the author of the review doesn't explain is the niche Gimp fills.

    - Why use such a complex piece of software for fixing red-eye or cropping?
    - Why one needs to use PS for certain prepress jobs.
    - Why one should use Film-Gimp (Cinepaint) for its 16-bit deep editing abilities.

    Gimp is not appropriate for every job, just like Perl or C++ have niches, and a review should explain what the appropriate tasks are.

    --
    This is not a signature.
    1. Re:Why use Gimp ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Gimp is not everything to everybody and it is definitely not a replacement for PS, nor it intends to be.

    2. Re:Why use Gimp ? by geekoid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Perl is a niche, C++ is not.
      There isn't any program that can't be done well in C++

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Why use Gimp ? by BetterSense · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For a linux editor of a somewhat more picasa-style everyday touch-up nature, check out digikam. It has a lot of fantastic utilities for basic editing; I particularly like it's "convert to B&W while providing previews of different colored lens filters". It really has the slick interface that gimp doesn't. But then gimp can do fancy layers and stuff, which digikam can't. If I could figure out how to use digikam to clone out dust etc. I would probably never use gimp.

    4. Re:Why use Gimp ? by xSauronx · · Score: 3, Informative

      fwiw, you can *use* picasa on linux. google offers a standalone package for the installation. i use GNOME so i went with picasa instead of digikam a while back, since it offers all I need for basic retouching and effects.

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    5. Re:Why use Gimp ? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What the author of the review doesn't explain is the niche Gimp fills.

      He is not reviewing GIMP, he is reviewing a book about it, so that kind of commentary is outside the scope of this book review.

    6. Re:Why use Gimp ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck running your C++ program natively in a browser.

    7. Re:Why use Gimp ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as we're plugging linux graphics programs, KolourPaint is a godsend for those wanting an MS Paint equivalent - something for creating pictures or doing some light photo editing. It's got the MS Paint features, BUT with:
       
        - Unlimited undos (not the - Zoom (both in and out, and to any level - not just 1x/2x/4x/8x)
        - Alpha channels (unfortunately only 1, but that's often enough)
        - Saveable palettes
        - Proper PNG support (plus a slew of other formats)
        - Hotkeys (customisable, too)
        - Custom rotate (not just 90/180/270)
        - Colour Eraser (only erase the selected colour)
        - Adjustable fuzziness (ie, some operations like flood fill/colour eraser will act on similar hues, not necessarily just the exact hue, useful for photos/colour gradients),
        - Textdraw that you can reposition whilst editing
        - Autocrop (automatic border detection + cropping)
        - Resize/Scale/Smooth Scale (Paint had scale and resize, but they were kludgy and difficult to use, and it didn't have the third)
        - Paste from file (saves opening the file in another window, then typing CTRL+A,CTRL+C,ALT+TAB,CTRL+V)
        - Inbuilt mailing
        - Full co-ordinate info in bottom right corner (so if you're moving something, it will tell you the old co-ordinate, the new co-ordinate and the relative shift)
        - A half dozen or so "effects" (emboss, soften/sharpen, etc)
        - Thumbnail window (useful for when you're zoomed in).
       
        I've not tried it on a non-KDE WM, so it may or may not be KDE native only - sorry GNOME/XFCE/etc users!

    8. Re:Why use Gimp ? by nashv · · Score: 1

      You mean "Perl HAS a niche, C++ DOES not."

      --
      Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
    9. Re:Why use Gimp ? by vurian · · Score: 1

      Like all KDE applications, Kolourpaint runs on any Unix desktop, Windows and OSX.

    10. Re:Why use Gimp ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gimp is not appropriate for every job, just like Perl or C++ have niches, and a review should explain what the appropriate tasks are.

      I agree.

      I also think this particular version is a waste of money due to the recent UI changes made in the most recent GIMP version.

      In addition, we will hopefully see full color depth editing in an upcoming version, which will significantly improve GIMP from a professional standpoint.

    11. Re:Why use Gimp ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      a review should explain what the appropriate tasks are

      A review of a book about using it should? Maybe a review of the program itself should, maybe the book should, but I don't think the author of the review is obligated to tell you what the program should be used for.

    12. Re:Why use Gimp ? by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      I also think this particular version is a waste of money due to the recent UI changes made in the most recent GIMP version.

      Waste of money? I'm not sure what you mean by this.

    13. Re:Why use Gimp ? by LingNoi · · Score: 1
  2. Re:Great book by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I flipped through Beginning GIMP in the bookstore, but I ultimately went with GIMP 2 for Photographers because my only real concern is editing photos that I've taken. You're right that game designers use GIMP, but so do people on *nix boxes who just want to retouch less than perfect photos. GIMP is such a multifaceted tool with diverse user communities that a guide to the program can't be everything for everyone.

  3. Gimp Rocks! by qwertphobia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love the Gimp. I find many features are easier to learn than Photoshop. It goes both ways though... some stuff is much nicer in Photoshop. I miss a few features though - Gimp doesn't do 16 bits per color channel (yet), and it doesn't do clipping paths in JPEG files (which arent part of the JPEG standards). If it could do both of these it would meet all my professional needs.

    --
    Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
    1. Re:Gimp Rocks! by moteyalpha · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I use gimp in conjunction with blender, inkscape, video editors, and other FOSS. I just recently discovered a new plugin for FFT. The greatest advantage to me is the fact that all the FOSS tools are integrated and I can modify them at source level, if I need to have something special.
      I quite often get the source package and make changes to make it more effective. This is something you can't do with PS or other closed source. I think this is the greatest advantage , if you are a programmer and graphics artist.
      Here is a link to gimp FFT if anybody might find it interesting.
      http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/The_GIMP/Remove_coherent_noise
      gimp FFT

    2. Re:Gimp Rocks! by bishiraver · · Score: 1

      Or layer grouping, or really anything useful when it comes to layers other than basic masking. If you're constructing anything more complicated than an icon, inkscape is better for you. And even that's annoying to use compared to illustrator.

    3. Re:Gimp Rocks! by uassholes · · Score: 1

      Cinepaint (film gimp) has the wider colors.

    4. Re:Gimp Rocks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love the GIMP, it lets me do more than most of the inbuilt editors in any OS I use, and doesn't cost a shedload of money like PhotoShop, and as I do a lot of work for volunteer organisations, I can give them the original files, and a copy of GIMP and I know that anyone can install it without needing pirated or expensive software.

    5. Re:Gimp Rocks! by Phat_Tony · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked out GIMP, it didn't have any color management- no CMM, no recognition of ICC profiles. This makes it near impossible to edit photographs for printing or print them with predictability. It was a definite deal killer.

      In fact, Linux was out, because I need color management in the OS too. Any progress on these fronts over the past 5 years or so? I'm always interested in Linux and check it out every so often, but so far my graphic arts needs have kept me on Macs.

      --
      Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
  4. Such a useful tool by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's really interesting how professionals pretty much ignore the GIMP in favor of Photoshop.

    Both toolkits have plenty of features, and GIMP certainly has many of the necessary features the Photoshop has provided for a while. Layers, filters, etc, GIMP has many of them. And support for plug-ins also helps make the case for the image editor.

    But in the end, professionals use Photoshop. It would be a pleasant surprise to hear that the last chapter of the book "Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional" was dedicated to the purchasing of Photoshop.

    1. Re:Such a useful tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There are some pretty big differences between GIMP and Photoshop that aren't apparent to hobbyists and casual users. Yes, GIMP has layers. However it doesn't have the extensive real-time editable and dynamic layer effects that Photoshop has. Common steps like adding an inner-glow and/or shadow in GIMP are awkward compared to Photoshop. That's not a big deal if you do it once in a while. If you do it all day long it's a pain in the ass and a waste of time.

      I could go on and on as to where Gimp falls short compared to Photoshop, but in the end I still LIKE the GIMP. It is a good tool for MOST people and certain jobs. It just doesn't work well with my work flow (most of the time). I've still put in 100's of hours using GIMP and I'm not afraid of using it or relearning how to do something, but at the end of the day you need to choose the best tool for the job and for most "professionals" Photoshop is the better tool.

    2. Re:Such a useful tool by mpapet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But in the end, professionals use Photoshop.

      Just like the legal community is pretty much still using WordPerfect. It has little basis in merit or features.

      The GIMP does the work of 80% of the worlds photoshop users, with about the same learning curve. The other 20% would run into a limitation and need to use some feature that is Adobe specific.

      --
      http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    3. Re:Such a useful tool by pdabbadabba · · Score: 1

      "Just like the legal community is pretty much still using WordPerfect."

      I was surprised myself to discover that this is actually not true. Some lawyers still prefer it, but in most large firms they pretty much use MS Word across the board.

      (IHWWALOLF = I have worked with a lot of large firms.)

    4. Re:Such a useful tool by gregthebunny · · Score: 1, Interesting

      But in the end, professionals use Photoshop.

      Simply using Photoshop because it's Photoshop and "it's what the professionals use" is dumb, and a follow of blind faith. The company I work for has been using GIMP more often for our projects, and our clients don't know the difference. The end result looks exactly the same. I don't doubt that we will drop Photoshop altogether once our licensing expires.

    5. Re:Such a useful tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does your firm have a web presence? I'd love to see some samples of what your company does.

    6. Re:Such a useful tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      OK, let's assume for the moment that the statement "The GIMP does the work of 80% of the worlds photoshop users" is true. The issue comes in that when you need any feature form the other 20%, you need to use PS. So, why learn two apps? Just learn PS and be done with it and then you have 100% of the features all the time. Yes PS is damn expensive. But, it's a world-class piece of s/w that is rivaled by none. Oh, and I doubt the the original supposition about Gimp having 80% of the features is really true. Certainly not when you count plugins, tutorials, and so on.

    7. Re:Such a useful tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The choice of Photoshop over GIMP has a huge basis in merit and features. It's not just crotchety old geezers too narrowminded to try somethign new. GIMP is an acceptable basic image editor--but as anything more than that, it falls short. By a LOT:

      Lack of high bit depth, lack of adjustment layers, lack of 4 color/spot color, lack of sophisticated tools (ala the automated HDR and Focus stacking in PS or 3D in PS Extended), lack of plug-ins, and the lack of an integrated design suite (Inkscape/Gimp/Scribus are not integrated at all, unlike Photoshop/Illustrator/Indesign/Dreamweaver/Flash/Fireworks/etc). Gimp is also cumbersome, especially for someone coming from PS.

      And don't think I'm an OSS hater--Inkscape is pretty much at parity Illustrator, and even has some cool features that Illustrator hasn't adopted (like Spiro vector editing). Scribus is a pretty good page layout program. But GIMP? No way. Gimp isn't anywhere near PS. It's not even near PS Elements.

    8. Re:Such a useful tool by yo_tuco · · Score: 1

      "lack of sophisticated tools (ala the automated HDR and Focus stacking in PS or 3D in PS Extended)"

      Features that have ruined landscape shots. Most everyones digital landscapes all look like fantasy pictures and the are all the same. Same tools, same sensors and same colors. Boring.

    9. Re:Such a useful tool by maxume · · Score: 0

      $1,000 is peanuts for something that you use everyday for years at a time. That suggests that features have plenty to do with it (even if a major feature is "I learned it first and it is what I am used to").

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    10. Re:Such a useful tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who gives a fuck about HDR landscapes? What if I want to shoot architectural interiors without having the windows turn into big blown out blocks of white? Don't make assumptions about how I want to use certain features.

    11. Re:Such a useful tool by Schmorgluck · · Score: 1

      I think the main problem with the Gimp is that most potential professional users are not coders, and it takes coders to add features through scripting. And most coders interested in contributing lack understanding of the needs of professional graphists.

      So, in terms of professional features, and if we put asides some shortcommings that are intrinsict to the current base engine, the "community will provide" approach common to many such FOSS projects seems to lack efficiency in the case of the Gimp. It certainly doesn't work as well as it works with FireFox, for example.

      --
      There's nothing like $HOME
    12. Re:Such a useful tool by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think the GP was implying that you should learn two programs. He was saying that for 80% of the people currently editing images, they could be using the Gimp with equal results to PS. For the remaining 20%, the Gimp is not an option, so they may be better served using PS.

      He wasn't saying that you should use the Gimp 80% of the time and then use PS for the remaining 20% of work that the Gimp lacks support for.

    13. Re:Such a useful tool by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's more that 80% of normal PC users or the people (mainly kids no doubt) illegaly downloading PS actually would only need GIMP as they aren't creating professional quality flyers, catalogues or anything else for print media.

    14. Re:Such a useful tool by skeeto · · Score: 1

      It's really interesting how professionals pretty much ignore the GIMP in favor of Photoshop.

      A fork of GIMP was used in producing the first Harry Potter movie, as well as several other movies.

    15. Re:Such a useful tool by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      The GIMP doesn't do CMYK, which is rather useful if you ever want to print.

      For anybody who does graphic design professionally, this shortcoming quite simply makes the GIMP completely inadequate, unless 100% of your work is going to be constrained to the digital realm.

      Similarly, the cost of photoshop isn't that much, compared to what graphic designers are paid.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  5. Re:Great book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -1 Spam

  6. I like GIMP by koan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Takes some getting use to but it is very powerful and I currently use it side by side with photoshop (GIMP has some interesting features not in CS3)
    I want to say thanks for the people that toil over these free programs.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:I like GIMP by Piata · · Score: 1

      What does the GIMP have that Photoshop doesn't?

      I haven't touched the GIMP in a while, but when I did it was woefully lacking in every department. As a hobbiest application, I'd recommend it over Photoshop Elements, but I've never seen a reason to use it instead of Photoshop.

    2. Re:I like GIMP by koan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      GIMP has come a long way you should try it now, and for me running CS3 there is a function in GIMP (I think it's MathMap)that Adobe didn't have (it's in CS4 now) but it was a math like function that created pretty interesting photos.

      Tons of plug ins now, a lot of added functionality and as the other person said it's free and you can use the source as you see fit.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    3. Re:I like GIMP by jcupitt65 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It has nice scripting and batch capabilities, if you're dorky enough to like script-fu or Python. Ars had a nice review of 2.6.4 recently:

      http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/01/gimp-2-6-review.ars

      They compare it to photoshop and list a few areas where they think it is ahead. The last page has a set of good/bad/ugly bullet points.

    4. Re:I like GIMP by astralpancakes · · Score: 4, Informative

      One thing I like about Gimp that Photoshop does in a confusing way is the way it presents alpha channels to you. In both apps you have a Channels palette. In Photoshop it contains R, G and B channels for the whole image, plus whatever extra channels, active masks etc you might be working with at the moment. If you want to save an image as partially transparent, Photoshop will in some cases, like when saving a .png, understand that transparent areas of the canvas should be given an alpha value of zero. In other cases, such as when saving a .tga, you need to select all the opaque areas manually and paste the selection as an alpha mask in the channels palette. What Gimp does is that it continuosly keeps an alpha channel in the channels palette, in addition to red, green and blue. This corresponds to the transparency of the entire image with all layers, just like the other channels correspond to the combined values of the entire thing. No confusion arises.

      I also like the fact that Gimp has a sensible, single undo system instead of the undo/redo-history state duality in Photoshop. Granted, the history does offer some stuff like multiple states, history brush etc that afaik isn't in Gimp.

      I'd probably find Gimp too limiting to go back to, now that I'm used to Photoshop, especially since X11 seems kind of iffy under OSX. If I didn't have Photoshop I'd probably use Pixelmator, but that's Mac only, so probably not an option for most.

      As an extremely casual follower of the gimp-dev mailing list, I also feel a certain amount of antipathy towards the developers, who a lot of the time seem to make things different from Photoshop just because they can. Like it or not, Photoshop is the de facto standard for image editing, and what many of your potential users will be familiar with. If someone complains that say, the controls for the unsharp mask filter are hard to use compared to what he's used to, the correct response should be to help him out, and maybe think about how you can make them easier, not flame him.

      On the other hand, people like the Pixelmator devs, the core Blender developers (who admittedly do get a lot of, in my opinion misguided, flak for the user interface of their program..) and yes, Adobe too, all seem to understand that if their apps are to function as tools for artists, then they should see themselves first and foremost as servants to the artists.

    5. Re:I like GIMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also like the fact that Gimp has a sensible, single undo system instead of the undo/redo-history state duality in Photoshop.

      I don't understand what you're saying here--I consider Photoshop's history to be far better than the undo option in any other program. I must state, however, that I never use Photoshop's undo/redo option, I always just step backward/forward in the history/

    6. Re:I like GIMP by astralpancakes · · Score: 1

      Same. I set up Ctrl-Z/Ctrl-Shift-Z to step backwards and forwards through the history on basically every machine I use Photoshop on. This doesn't work in some special cases, like during a free transform, though.

      I did say the History system was better. It's so much better I think it should be the only form of undo.

    7. Re:I like GIMP by Ninnle+Labs,+LLC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and you can use the source as you see fit.

      Which is useless to probably 99% of the users of either the GIMP or PS.

    8. Re:I like GIMP by koan · · Score: 2, Funny

      So is lens flare but it still exist.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    9. Re:I like GIMP by Ninnle+Labs,+LLC · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if you are trying to use that as some sort of selling point for GIMP to PS users, then you are sadly going to get nothing but yawns.

    10. Re:I like GIMP by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

      Others have mentioned various things, but I really like the GIMP's color picker, as seen here.

      That said, I really want some equivalent to OpenCanvas on linux. Really, any sort of digital painting program. No, not some MS Paint clone, not even one with layers. GIMP plus custom brushes is workable but clunky, and the UI is terribly unsuited to the task.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    11. Re:I like GIMP by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      t, I also feel a certain amount of antipathy towards the developers, who a lot of the time seem to make things different from Photoshop just because they can.

      Perhaps that's to sidestep patents?

    12. Re:I like GIMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *whoosh*

  7. Aw man... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why didn't they name it "Bringing Out the Gimp" From Novice to Professional 2nd Ed
    Seriously, who wouldn't buy this book with that name?

    If nothing else, you'd get some awesome looks in your office when people see it sitting on your bookshelf. (right next to your orange ball-gag, of course)

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:Aw man... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 1

      Flamebait?

      Moderator, you fail at humor.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
  8. dead on arrival by viridari · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've got Gimp 2.6.1 on my box. Why would I want to buy a new book published about the 2.4 series?

    1. Re:dead on arrival by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

      Are there any decent books on 2.6 yet? It's been out for 5 months, that's not long in publishing cycle terms.

    2. Re:dead on arrival by viridari · · Score: 1

      It may have been out for months, but it has been in development for much longer. Any author writing about software ought to be in tune with development roadmaps and syncing their writing up with anticipated releases so that their books can hopefully drop in time with the software that they are writing about.

    3. Re:dead on arrival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most books written about [latest technology] are simply [previous technology] with a few updates. Which makes sense, usually there aren't that many differences between a x.y and an x.(y+2) release. If you are a true beginner, the differences don't matter that much, you're not going to get better faster reading a book on 2.6 than 2.4, unless there was some massive overhaul on how EVERYTHING was done. Gimp simply doesn't do that.

  9. If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 3, Insightful
    and a more intuitive workflow, a lot less of this book would really be necessary and GIMP might actually find some greater acceptance.

    As goofy as the Adobe GUI is, Photoshop is the poop, pure and simple, and all other image appas are compared to it. Painter, for example is slower and clumsier, but it has awesome brushes, MS Paint is its own hobbled ugliness but has its uses, GIMP is ugly and retarded, but it's free and it works, etc. The day Adobe puts CS on Linux is the day GIMP gets a stake driven through its heart. Ad that day can't come too soon, IMHO. I'd love to run CS on a Linux box and be done with Mac AND Windows and run on generic hardware.

    I've been advocating for YEARS for Adobe to sell Linux boxen with CS locked on and pre-installed. They could give the computer away for practically free. BUY SOFTWARE - FREE COMPUTER!

    I would also suggest that Adobe needs to jump on this now, as Linux is gaining greater acceptance, GIMP will also, and they don't want GIMP to rule that platform - first in and all that.

    I'll definitely buy this book. I dislike GIMP intensely, but knowing it better might take an edge off.

    RS RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    1. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Linux boxen with CS locked on and pre-installed.

      I think I just had an orgasm. That would be the greatest system seller since Steve Jobs realized he could charge 50% more for a computer if he painted it orange and rounded some corners on the case.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 0

      I agree - but of course stating the obvious and coming up with a great idea gets modded flamebait... Mustn't ruffle the feathers of the true believers...

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    3. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Em+Emalb · · Score: 0

      -1 get off this guy's lawn.

      (apparently you've pissed off the pro-Gimp folks with mod points)

      The funny thing is that people have been complaining forever about the gimp interface, but I guess you've struck a nerve.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
    4. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by mpapet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've been advocating for YEARS for Adobe to sell Linux boxen with CS locked on and pre-installed.

      Adobe has a long history of hatred for Free software going way, way back to ghostscript. The hatred is born from the fact that they can't IP litigate Free software to a certain death like they have most graphics software innovators.

      --
      http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    5. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by cathector · · Score: 1

      i agree, the reason i don't use GIMP is not a lack of features, it's the cumbersome UI. technically, imagemagick has a ton of these features also. i feel like i spend 70% of my time with GIMP just managing windows, navigating dialogs, etc, compared to about 30% with CS. for simple image tasks like futzing with brightness or mocking up a UI for work, my app of choice is PaintShop Pro 7. it launches instantly and is very lightweight yet has layers, a UI that does the job and gets out of the way, etc. But Corel bought PSP and since version 9 and especially 10 it's been a bloated unfriendly beast.

    6. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by gregthebunny · · Score: 0

      I'll definitely buy this book. I dislike GIMP intensely, but knowing it better might take an edge off.

      Have you tried GIMPshop?

    7. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
      Yeah - I know about GIMPshop and:

      In OS X, you will also need X11 or XDarwin in order to launch and run Gimpshop.

      I'm not going to dump out to X11 to run something that, while close, is not BETTER than Photoshop. That exceeds my hassle factor. I should click it and it should open, period. Running X11 or XDarwin is NOT why I run OS X. I have better things to do with my time.

      RS

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    8. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by lena_10326 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      GIMP is ugly and retarded, but it's free and it works

      You may find it unintuitive, but I think that's more of a symptom of expecting GIMP to function like Photoshop (or possibly a misunderstanding of the more complex functions). It's a different app; it's going to present a different solution for solving the same problem.

      I've been using GIMP for years on and off and much more so in the last 2 years. The menus and dialogs have decent organization, with the one exception in 2.6.x. They moved the dialogs under Windows -> Dockable Dialogs. Pulling up a dialog is a very common action so adding 1 more thing to click becomes noticeable. Nonetheless, I'm highly skeptical your opinion is based on anything substantive and not coming from religious disagreement.

      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    9. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Of course it strikes a nerve.

      For as long as people have been complaining about the gimp UI, pro-gimpers have been saying "that's how linux UIs work, it's better, get over it and get a virtual desktop to manage the windows"

      They can't for the life of them figure out why prospective users aren't eating that up, as opposed to (quite reasonably imo) wanting a UI consistent with the majority of other ones the users work with.

      For the record I do use Gimp, but I quite regularly feel as if I'm fighting with the interface to get something done, or having to make lots of extra clicks to deal with window focus changes.

    10. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny. I could say the same thing as a long time GIMP user only recently exposed to Photoshop.

      "How do I do this? I have to do what?! But in GIMP it's a simple as..."

    11. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and a more intuitive workflow, a lot less of this book would really be necessary and GIMP might actually find some greater acceptance.

      As goofy as the Adobe GUI is, Photoshop is the poop, pure and simple, and all other image appas are compared to it. Painter, for example is slower and clumsier, but it has awesome brushes, MS Paint is its own hobbled ugliness but has its uses, GIMP is ugly and retarded, but it's free and it works, etc. The day Adobe puts CS on Linux is the day GIMP gets a stake driven through its heart. Ad that day can't come too soon, IMHO. I'd love to run CS on a Linux box and be done with Mac AND Windows and run on generic hardware.

      I've been advocating for YEARS for Adobe to sell Linux boxen with CS locked on and pre-installed. They could give the computer away for practically free. BUY SOFTWARE - FREE COMPUTER!

      I would also suggest that Adobe needs to jump on this now, as Linux is gaining greater acceptance, GIMP will also, and they don't want GIMP to rule that platform - first in and all that.

      I'll definitely buy this book. I dislike GIMP intensely, but knowing it better might take an edge off.

      RS

      RS

      I run CS3 on Suse Linux 11.0 using Wine. It seldom freezes and only when I have to, do I switch to CS4 running on a Windoiz 64-bit box.

    12. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by rhizome · · Score: 1

      You may find it unintuitive, but I think that's more of a symptom of expecting GIMP to function like Photoshop

      If by "function like Photoshop" you mean "always have a visible toolbox," then I'm right there with ya.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    13. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, that *is* constructive criticism. Gimp's awful GUI and generally "ugly" look are two of the big things holding it back from mainstream appeal. Mainstream users expect their programs to have a basic "professional" appearance. Too many OSS programmers neglect to even consider this, to the detriment of what may actually be a decent underlying program.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    14. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 1

      There is nothing at all intuitive about image manipulation. Nothing. Image manipulation isn't as easy as crayons or fingerpainting, and that's about the most image manipulation most folks have done before they take an interest. Speaking as a hobbyist, I find the options of both PS *and* GIMP bewildering.

      So we have to learn.

      To learn the concepts involves training on an application. Since I'm starting from zero knowledge, it's an uphill battle on either PS or GIMP. I chose to train on the GIMP because it's free and looks like it can do what I want.

      So now I know GIMP better than Photoshop, and when I go to Photoshop it feels different. Not what I'm used to.

      Unintuitive.

      GIMP is making strides among people who are not yet professionals, but are on their way to becoming professionals.

      In other words, novices.

      In other words, exactly the target audience of this book. It's a good book for a good program.

    15. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by icebrain · · Score: 1

      for simple image tasks like futzing with brightness or mocking up a UI for work, my app of choice is PaintShop Pro 7. it launches instantly and is very lightweight yet has layers, a UI that does the job and gets out of the way, etc.

      Cathector here speaks the truth.

      I use version 6 myself; best simple graphics program ever. No, if you're doing professional- or art-quality stuff, it might not be suitable, but it's good for the lightweight everyday stuff. A few nice advanced features, but enough simplicity for basic things too. Think of the simplicity of MSPaint with layers and some image manipulation stuff as well.

      The best part? Drawing a circle is as easy as clicking the circle tool and the color you want. None of this "select an area, do something else, then do something else". Want a line? Just draw a line like you would in paint. No dicking around with all this other stuff.

      Hell, my dad was able to figure it out.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    16. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The day Adobe releases the source to CS is the day GIMP gets a stake driven through its heart

      Fixed that for you! Obviously, as long as photoshop is closed source there will be a need for Gimp.

      (On second thought, even if photoshop did go open source, I can't imagine gimp would be abandoned. It's nothing less than a staple of open source desktop software.)

    17. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is a boxen?

      Is that some kind of stupid, cutesy term to describe more than one computer?

    18. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by viralMeme · · Score: 1

      If GIMP had a decent GUI and a more intuitive workflow, a lot less of this book would really be necessary and GIMP might actually find some greater acceptance.

      I disagree, it's different than Photoshop but gets the job done. But why not let people make their own minds up. Hands-on experience is worth any amount of reviews ..

      'the GNU Image Manipulation Program. It is a freely distributed piece of software for such tasks as photo retouching, image composition and image authoring. It works on many operating systems, in many languages'

      Here's a modification that replicates the look of Photoshop - GIMPshop

    19. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i have no experience with mac
      but it shouldn't matter in this case
      don't you have to run occasional X clients on one
      of your servers or does ssh does the job already ?

    20. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you must be new here.

    21. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure he meant to type "boxed."

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    22. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by RedK · · Score: 1

      MacGimp automagically starts X11 when you click on its icon. Xorg now comes bundled with OS X since 10.5. There is no hassle at all.

      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    23. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1

      Cool! had no idea. THANKS! I'll DL the latest and see how that goes...

      --
      Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    24. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      My wife and I both use gimp. When I use it on her system I find it very clumsy because she uses click to focus, while I use focus follows mouse.

      It could be that the people who like the gimp UI work like me and don't experience the focus problems you get if you have to click in a window before using a key.

    25. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Adobe is just plain stupid by not porting to linux.

      We have lots of clients stuck on CS2 and majority of their IT expenses are going to windows-related stuff like volume licensing and whatnot. They'd migrate to linux and CS4 right now if it would be possible.

    26. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      I think "ugly" may be a fair, if underspecified complaint.

      "Retarded" is on the other side of unspecific.

      As a matter of fact, disagreement with the GUI is a central criticism, so hand-wavy complaint here is particularly counterproductive and annoying. "Awful" doesn't advance the dialog, either.

      Note that "it's uncomfortably different from what I'm familiar with" is a valid complaint.

    27. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by lordtoran · · Score: 1

      For as long as people have been complaining about the gimp UI, pro-gimpers have been saying "that's how linux UIs work, it's better, get over it and get a virtual desktop to manage the windows"

      What they really mean is "that's how our Gtk toolkit in all its archaic glory works. We designed it specifically for the Gimp and it has never been more than a kludge, and we have no intention to improve on that because GNU and Gnome use it, so it must rock."

      --
      Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat /boot/vmlinuz > /dev/dsp
    28. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      For the record I do use Gimp, but I quite regularly feel as if I'm fighting with the interface to get something done, or having to make lots of extra clicks to deal with window focus changes.

      If you like GIMP but not it's GUI you can try Gimpshop which has a more Photoshop like gui.

      Falcon

    29. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

      I use GIMP on an Eee. I'd rather not have the toolbox always visible. However, if you want that, you have options. Virtual desktops, or making the dialog box 'always on top'...it's a workable situation. It's also a problem for the window manager, not the application. It is a design feature that you can set up the program to display the toolbox or not, and it is far more sensible to use a WM to determine whether a window is showing than any other solution.

      Also, since when does Photoshop always have a visible toolbox?

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    30. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can install Photoshop CS2 on Linux, I have it running on Ubuntu 8.10 without any problems. I installed it using WINE.

    31. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I should click it and it should open, period.

      You know, X11 Mac apps do that. You click on the Gimp.app (for example) icon in the dock (or in /Applications), and it starts. If X11 isn't running yet, it automatically launches. And you don't have to "dump out" to anything, either -- native app windows and X app windows are on the same desktop.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    32. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GUI got Fixed! now 60% of existing gimp users are scratching their heads and wondering what's going on, of course in time they'll get the hang of it, but the UI was changed substantially, in part, i'm sure, to placate the whiners.

    33. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gimp does always have a visible toolbox, with the new default window hints in 2.6 you can't get rid of it unless you press tab, don't troll until you've tried it.

    34. Re:If GIMP had a decent GUI... by rhizome · · Score: 1

      with the new default window hints in 2.6 you can't get rid of it unless you press tab

      Well, then they must have inexplicably removed it from my 2.6.2 copy.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
  10. In the beginning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the beginning, there was the General Image Manipulation Program, and it was good, if primitive. This was the first year.

    Then was created version 0.56, and even though it still depended on Motif, it was still good. It was the second year.

    In the third year, version 0.60 was releasedeth, and the name changethed to GNU Image Manipulation Program.

    The rest is history.

  11. Re:First 5 Chapters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "are about arranging all windows from GIMP so the novice can start drawing"

    It is not a drawing application. But yeah, all 3 windows, wow. Better than PS on the Mac. It is one large window that takes up your whole 2560x1600 screen to edit your 1024x1024 Flickr photo.

  12. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by gustgr · · Score: 1

    Just because it does not have an MDI it doesn't mean the GUI is bad. Gimp's interface follows a common pattern amongst *nix software -- or what they used to look like.

  13. Whereever I am on the road from novice to pro, by hey! · · Score: 1

    I'll always be a cheapskate.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  14. Two things by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well, Freedom for one, and price for another.

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    1. Re:Two things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll just point out that the Photoshop Elements that the grandparent mentioned came free with my Wacom tablet - a tool that's nowadays rather common for many of the professionals and hobbists that would use either Photoshop or the GIMP.

    2. Re:Two things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Freedom for one

      You ignored the parent poster's primary point--it was that GIMP lags behind Photoshop in every feature area.

      Why not address the meat of the post, rather than give a smart-ass answer to a rhetorical question?

      Yes, GIMP is Free and free. But a F/free product that doesn't do what you need it to isn't very useful, now is it?

    3. Re:Two things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it have anything that matters to someone using it professionally?

    4. Re:Two things by nashv · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      OMG! He said Freedom, and he was marked a troll...but...but...this is Slashdot! Now I've seen everything (shoots himself in the head).

      --
      Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
    5. Re:Two things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The glory hole is free, but I prefer pussy. But whatever floats your boat, fag.

  15. addendum by coryking · · Score: 3, Funny

    Given infinite time and resources, [t]here isn't any program that can't be done well in C++

    Fixed that for you.

    1. Re:addendum by SupplyMission · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given infinite time and resources, [t]here isn't any program that can't be done well in C++

      Fixed that for you.

      Not true. The assertion that you will somehow need infinite resources and time to develop programs, just because you're using C++, is completely false, not to mention ignorant.

      With a solid knowledge of C++ and STL, Boost and a handful of other what I'd call core libraries, you can accomplish most tasks very quickly. Similarly if you are experienced in Perl, you can accomplish tasks quickly with few lines of code. On the other hand, if you are a beginner in Perl or C++, you can easily waste days or weeks solving simple problems in messy, convoluted ways.

      This knee-jerk response that C++ absorbs "infinite time and resources", for no reason other than the fact that it's C++, is not constructive at all, and just serves to exhibit your own tunnel vision when it comes to Perl (or whatever your tool of choice happens to be).

    2. Re:addendum by overlordofmu · · Score: 0

      I always liked this one:

      "C combines all the elegance and power of assembly language with the portability of assembly language."

    3. Re:addendum by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 2, Funny

      "C combines all the elegance and power of assembly language with the portability of assembly language."

      Yeah, but we're talking about C++ here.

      So you need to add in "... with all the readability of perl"

      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    4. Re:addendum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because *YOU* would absorb infinite time and resources on a project if allowed to doesn't mean most people would opt to do the same.

      Given infinite time and discussion, you may or may not agree with me.

    5. Re:addendum by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Given infinite time and resources, [t]here isn't any program that can't be done well in C++

      The assertion that you will somehow need infinite resources and time to develop programs, just because you're using C++, is completely false...

      Mu.

      I know it's complex, but I think you'll be able to understand. Try thinking about it more slowly.

      He was saying there is not any kind of program that cannot be done well in C++ (with infinite resources). Whoa, confusing. Collapsed a bit, any kind of program can be done well in C++ (with infinite resources). Paraphrased, even programs that aren't well-suited to being done in C++ can be done well in C++ (with infinite resources).

      Nowhere in this can we find the idea that "no program can be done well in C++" or "C++ necessarily requires infinite resources regardless of the type of program". Thus the appropriate response to your objection is "mu". Clearer?

  16. Call me gimpy... by Hoyty1 · · Score: 1

    when it comes GIMP that is. I downloaded GIMP a few months ago to try it out and because I needed something to make simple graphics for a class I was taking in XNA.

    I wanted to draw a circle with some sort of automated device to point click and drag out the size of what I needed.

    I never figured out how to do it. I spent about 15 minutes (yeah I'm impatient, bite me) looking for some kind of plugin to do so, nothing was immediately apparent, or easy to install for that matter. So I gave up and downloaded paint.net, which fulfilled all my needs instantly.

    I'm pretty new to trying to get deeper into computers but this was not a good start for me, and instantly dropped this sort of venture down a few points in my eyes.

    I might however give this book a try, maybe I'll find a gem within this tangled mess yet. However this book may be too little to convince those looking for simple functionality. I think that too many people have been infected with the need for everything they want to be there right away. At least in regards to simple functions, if I want to make a stick figure I shouldn't have to read a readme file, I should have line and circle drawing tools immediately apparent.

    This is the part where you all say "Stupid Hoyty1, the button you needed was right there."

    --
    My Comic : www.ourbadidea.com
    Blame the artist for all mistakes!
    1. Re:Call me gimpy... by fl!ptop · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is the part where you all say "Stupid Hoyty1, the button you needed was right there."

      1. using the ellipse select tool, draw your circle.
      2. open the paths dialog
      3. click 'selection to path'
      4. click 'paint along the path'
      --
      When you recognize love in another and realize how precious it is, everything else seems so insignificant.
    2. Re:Call me gimpy... by LiXiang · · Score: 1

      You can draw a circle by using the ellipse selection tool, then Edit -> Stroke from either the menu bar or the context menu.

    3. Re:Call me gimpy... by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      Don't feel bad, The Gimp is notoriously hard to get used to. IIRC, to make a circle you have to make a circular selection then tell it to make a line around that, or something along those lines. "Draw a straight line" is another common task that newbies often fail at.

      I'm so glad to finally be back in Photoshop. I've got more total time in The Gimp by far, but Photoshop's still easier to use and gets in my way less often (though it is buggy as hell, which is something I've never had a problem with in The Gimp)

    4. Re:Call me gimpy... by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This seems like about twice as many steps as it should be.

      Is there a technical reason for making it be regarded as creating a path from a selection and then filling it, rather than say something like this:

      1) Ellipse tool (optional checkbox to force ellipse to be circular, brush size, hardness, etc)
      2) Click on center point of ellipse, drag out to desired dimension, release
      3) Ellipse gets painted with whatever color you have in the palette

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    5. Re:Call me gimpy... by DrLang21 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I love GIMP for my home use of cropping, rescaling, and general minor editing of images, it's these kind of ridiculous UI complexities that drive many professionals right back to photoshop. I don't know how difficult it is to implement a click/drag approach to drawing a circle or a straight line, but it's something that should be on the priority list for the development community, along with a "Photoshop Compatibility Mode" interface option to ease transition of professionals who's experience is entrenched in Photoshop as well as making it easier for Photoshop and GIMP users to talk back and forth about how to do the something that can be done on both applications.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    6. Re:Call me gimpy... by chammy · · Score: 1

      GIMP isn't really made for creating images. It says right there in the name it's for manipulation, not drawing/painting. Use the right tool for the job and you'll be happy with the results. Try to change a tire with a banana peel and you'll have just as much frustration.

    7. Re:Call me gimpy... by maxume · · Score: 1

      If you are on windows, give Paint.NET a try. It doesn't cost anything, so make sure to use the official download (there are 'opportunists' that charge for it):

      http://www.getpaint.net/download.html

      Not as feature laden as Photoshop, but a lot more similar to Photoshop than the Gimp (there are silly redundant path tools right on the default toolbox).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    8. Re:Call me gimpy... by DrLang21 · · Score: 1

      It says right there in the name it's for manipulation, not drawing/painting.

      Granted. However, considering how often I see people claim that GIMP can replace Photoshop for most users, I find this to be an issue. I know of lots of people who use (read pirate) Photoshop, and sometimes combine it with Illustrator, for drawing on a computer. You could argue that Photoshop is also not the correct tool for this, but many actually prefer it over Corel Draw and Illustrator because the use the image manipulation functions in process. I don't know what percentage of users only use Photoshop for editing photos as compared to creating images, but it's significant enough that if GIMP users want to suggest it as a replacement for Photoshop, then the drawing community needs to be appeased. Not to mention, what if I want to circle something in a photo while editing the photo in other ways? (Also, ignore the straight line comment. I just poked around and found it not at all unintuitive. Figuring out the circle was a bitch even with instructions.)

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    9. Re:Call me gimpy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry you had that experience (for the record, I did too, and I'm nuts about the GIMP) - but GIMP, like Photoshop is for photo manipulation - not drawing. If they put all the buttons relevant to drawing up the front, it would infuriate those who are wanting to use it efficiently for photo manipulation (ie, the target audience). It's much like how a big rig is for moving cargo - although it'd work as a car in a pinch, it's far from ideal. Try using MS Paint/Scribbles(or whatever OSX has)/Krita/XPaint/KolourPaint/GNUPaint) for drawing, and copying to GIMP if you need to manipulate.

    10. Re:Call me gimpy... by DaedylusSL · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I had the same problem with GIMP at first. Then I realized that by using the "Paint along Path" or "Stroke Selection" options you can draw your ellipse (or rectangle or whatever) with _any_ of the available painting tools and brushes. You're not limited to just a simple colored shape, like you are if you use something like MS Paint. In typical GIMP fashion, it's a couple of non-intuitive steps that give you a great amount of flexibility.

    11. Re:Call me gimpy... by viralMeme · · Score: 1

      There is a Photoshop Compatibility Mode .. To draw a straight line, select pen and then press SHIFT .. To draw a circle use this or else a script someone produced ..

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?hl=en-GB&v=s4z7f2_BpBA&gl=GB

      http://xoomer.virgilio.it/lwcon/gimp/script-fu/draw-circle-point.htm

      http://www.gimpshop.com/

    12. Re:Call me gimpy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how difficult it is to implement a click/drag approach to drawing a circle or a straight line,

      Well, technically it's already in there. You see, with GIMP you are always performing an operation on a selection. So it's more logical (but longer) to select what you want to edit, and then transform that selection with whatever other things you want. Essentially "drawing" a line is really (from a low-level point of view) performing a selection on those pixels, and then doing a color transformation. The "line" tool you use in Photoshop just hides this process from you.

      Basically what you are asking for is a pre-made set of scripts/plugins that provide special-purpose tools which perform the selection and transformation all together.
      I agree that this is certainly something that is needed in GIMP "out of the box". The capability to add such tools already exists, but most users (even professionals) don't want to spend a lot of time building basic tools like these.

    13. Re:Call me gimpy... by bh_doc · · Score: 1

      As someone who has a hobby interest in creating images, what other free option do I have?

      I'm holing out hope for Krita, but that even has some stubborn stupidities that need sorting out (like Qt dropping old tablet events).

    14. Re:Call me gimpy... by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that's pretty much the kind of answer I was looking for.

      I use Gimp/Photoshop primarily for editing photographs rather than creating graphics so I'm less familiar with that end of it.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    15. Re:Call me gimpy... by chammy · · Score: 1

      If you can't figure out how to use paths or selections to make strokes in GIMP, you can use inkscape to make the shapes etc (if you need raster operations edit the result in GIMP).

      I personally would never use a "draw circle" button in the GIMP and I wonder why people are having so much trouble with it. It took me about five minutes to figure out how to stroke a selection back when I first started, and now that GIMP has the insanely great selection handles I don't see where a tool like the ellipse thing from MSPaint would fit in.

  17. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Samschnooks · · Score: 1
    That may be so, but with all those windows and the redundant access to functions, it just adds unneeded complexity and confusion.And if you have an email client open, browser and a file browser open, you have a very busy desktop and taskbar.

    Many times when I'm working with it, I put my browser in focus and then my email client and maybe something else. When I go back to GIMP by clicking on one of the taskbar items or one of th window frames, only that particular GIMP window comes up, upon which, I have to go hunting for the window that I actually need at that time. I wish ALL the GIMP windows would come into focus.

    No, I don't like the UI at all: it's too confusing, cumbersome, redundant, and complex.

    Like it or not, the Windows and Mac UIs are the standards that just about everyone expects with regards to GUIs.

  18. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Insightful

    [Gimp] needs a proper UI.

    And just what do you think is "improper" about the one it has now?

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  19. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Millennium · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just because it does not have an MDI it doesn't mean the GUI is bad.

    This is true as far as it goes. MDI is a blight on UI design that belongs in the dustbin of history. However...

    Gimp's interface follows a common pattern amongst *nix software -- or what they used to look like. ...just because it follows patterns established on systems that were never designed for GUIs in the first place and never really "got" the concept for years even after the introduction of X11 doesn't mean the UI is good. GIMP has made great strides in usability since 1.0, but it still has quite a long way to go. There's a reason it was, and still is to some degree, the poster child for bad GUIs on Linux.

  20. Can I get the book for free too? by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    A proprietary book? Insults my FOSS ethics, it does!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  21. Subtitle is misleading. by owlnation · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "From Novice to Professional"

    Sorry no, but in your dreams. GIMP is not a professional tool -- very far from it. It's has little more functionality than Elements. It lacks essential professional tools. It's worthless to a professional.

    Perhaps the subtitle should be "From Novice to Enthusiastic Amateur".

    1. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by gregben · · Score: 1

      OK, so what does a professional image editor have to have that GIMP doesn't?

    2. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Professional" is a naked adjective, completely meaningless by itself. One that computer graphics artists for some reason seem to throw around a lot when talking about how much someone spent on their software. Let me guess, you post regularly on cgtalk.com?


      Protip: there's a shitload of fields where the image editing needs of the "professional" in that particular field would be adequately filled by GIMP.

    3. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by danhm · · Score: 1

      Support for color modes other than greyscale and RGB, for one thing.

    4. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by joelholdsworth · · Score: 1

      Those will come soon, and if you're not doing print or broadcast work, that isn't such a big deal.

    5. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Legrow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A price tag.

    6. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those will come soon

      And then it will finally be the year of the GIMP! Yay!

    7. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What professionals are you talking about?

      If you mean: "I do photography for a magazine," or "I do big budget advertising work." Yeah, sure. Lack of CMYK support and good color calibration are a killer. The GIMP is not a suitable tool for those professionals.

      If you mean: "I'm a reporter for a small weekly newspaper who is also expected to be her own photographer and do her own photo cropping and correction," the GIMP is ready today. It was ready several years ago when a friend in exactly that position gave it a try. She was using Photoshop to do the work and found that the GIMP was a complete replacement. (She didn't like the interface, but GIMPshop instantly eliminated that complaint.) If you mean, "I'm doing web design for a small company," the GIMP is ready today.

      I am also curious what people did before Photoshop itself got CMYK support, or good color calibration, or whatever it is you're whining about today. Were there just no professionals in the field then?

    8. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by nashv · · Score: 1

      Support for Image Analysis that is as good as Photoshop (in the least) That is not to say Photoshop is the best, IMHO, the best image analysis program is the free and open source ImageJ

      --
      Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
    9. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by MotorMachineMercenar · · Score: 3, Informative

      1. Color-managed workflow - a must for even a serious amateur
      2. Proper printing (see also 1)
      3. No need to spend numerous hours learning a new UI and workflow
      4. A massive library of plugins
      5. Built-in stitching (used by landscape pros)
      6. GIMP probably doesn't have Smart Filters and some other advanced doodads which have made later CS versions indispensable for those (admittedly few people) who know how to use them

      I used GIMP when I really wanted to move entirely to Ubuntu. But points 1, 2 and 6 broke GIMP for me. I hate sticking to XP just so I can have PS, but that's the price I have to pay to have proper photo editing.

      --
      "We have an A-Bomb...what more do you want, mermaids?" --I.I. Rabi, speaking in defense of Robert Oppenheimer
    10. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am also curious what people did before Photoshop itself got CMYK support, or good color calibration, or whatever it is you're whining about today. Were there just no professionals in the field then?

      CMYK was in Photoshop 2.0--around 1991, I recall. At that point, most professionals were still working in realspace a lot of the time.

      Color calibration is a function of hardware (the monitor or printer) not the software.

      Alternate color profile support has been in Photoshop for a very long time--probably as long as CMYK.

      Is there any more idiocy you'd care to spout, or would you like to crawl back under your bridge now?

    11. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by FrankieBaby1986 · · Score: 1

      That term... I do not think it means what you think...

      Really, I think the terms 'Novice' and 'Professional' were meant to be applied to proficiency with the GIMP, and not digital photo manipulation in general.

      --
      ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
    12. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by jaymz2k4 · · Score: 1

      GIMP has a number of tools which are actually really useful - for professionals and amateurs alike. The select tools for example are far better than those provided even in photoshop cs3. yes, CMYK support is lacking, 9 times out of 10 thats the main argument people give me for when this topic invariably comes up and i would say 6 or 7 times out of ten they have no actual need for CMYK output.

      Photoshop is brilliant, GIMP is also brilliant. I frequently use both in tandem to get things done. comparing GIMP to elements shows a lack of understanding of just how good GIMP is.

      More color modes would be good, as would grouping layers but for a lot of touch-up work or compositing GIMP does a very good job. Comments like 'its worthless to a professional' make me think you havent really used it that much or you are so used to photoshop that you write off GIMP as worthless as its not a total clone.

      The other thing I never got was the hostility to was the UI. Photoshop has the same sort of idea on windows - the floating boxes like navigation/layers/paths etc. In fact I always thought it looked a lot like a mac app with the 'totally floating' look unlike a 'normal' app which was self contained in its own container window. I fail to see the complication.

      Anyway, these never-ending recurring topics (linux v windows, gimp v photoshop, vi v everything) really tire me. So I'm done. If your a 'professional' designer you probably already using Creative Suite and if so then it wont do you any harm to try GIMP or to use it alongside PS. If youre a home user (who doesnt want to pirate) then either pay the $/£/E for Photoshop or use GIMP and be thankful that software like this is even available...

      --
      jaymz
    13. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 1

      I can understand a professional pooh-poohing GIMP, because I've taught Photoshop to professional photographers now for a couple of years, and they love to try GIMP out for a couple of days and then add it to their software sh** list.

      Overly flexible use of the word "professional" is the problem. Out of all of my students who can be considered professionals, I've noticed that my students who started out with GIMP and keep using it alongside Photoshop after they learn Photoshop are, as a rule far more professional than all respects than their peers. The people who stick with Photoshop and crap all over GIMP after a short trial period tend to be one or more of the following: 1) spoiled, 2) inexperienced, and 3) exceedingly ignorant of fundamental image editing concepts. In other words, Photoshop is not their tool, it's their job. So instead of spending money on hardware like fast computers and nice cameras, they're dropping major cash for overpriced Adobe seminars and services, not to mention upgrades.

      My GIMP-loving students seriously tend to kick butt. They know how pixels and bit depth really work, even if they don't have the bit depth to work with in GIMP. So their results shine regardless.

    14. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Ninnle+Labs,+LLC · · Score: 1

      16-bit and floating point support.

    15. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by cekander · · Score: 1

      If you mean, "I'm doing web design for a small company," the GIMP is ready today.

      That's me. But I tell ya, not a day goes by that I don't dream about the boss buying me a photoshop license.

    16. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as you're not doing work for print (CMYK), see if he'll spring for Photoshop Elements--it's cheap and it does almost everything real Photoshop does.

    17. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by gregben · · Score: 1

      I have three machines running Ubuntu 8.04LTS + Virtualbox + Windows XP. This works pretty well
      for those cases where you prefer Linux but have to be able to run specific Windows applications.
      I have 4GB of RAM in each of these machines so as to be able to have adequate of RAM for the virtual
      machine(s).

    18. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      It got CMYK, and thus raised the bar for everyone.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    19. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

      Tell you what, I'll be a nice guy and sell you this copy of GIMP here for a very reasonable $1,800.

    20. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      It's nice to hear corroboration of the idea that competent and happy GIMP users are generally smarter and more capable graphics editors than their gripey counterparts, but I should beware my own confirmation bias. How many students are we talking about here? How many classes? Over what span of time? You mention bit depth and "pixels" -- are there more evidentiary details you can share to clarify your claim of their greater skill? Have you seen this greater skill tendency beyond your classes and students?

      Now, with all that said (or asked), I should note that varying intelligence levels is just a fact of life. If Photoshop were indeed a sine qua non for less intelligent people, then that would just be the fact of the matter and it still ought to be possible to adjust GIMP's usability to be more competitive in the Stupider Market.

      I mean, unless the resistance is due to sheer unfamiliarity with the interface. In which case that's a tough cookie. (But maybe even then...?)

    21. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Photoshop has had these features for a looong time. I think CMYK and calibration stuff came in 2.0, which was when editing pictures on your PC was far from mainstream

    22. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I am also curious what people did before Photoshop itself got ...

      When I used photoshop some time ago it didn't even have undo (which gimp had at the time). I assumed I just couldn't find it and asked a newsgroup about it - getting dozens of flames saying "real professionals would never need to use undo" (a bit bizzare since I said I was just learning how to use it). Now of course gimp and the current photoshop are both far superior in every way to that early photoshop.
      99% of the time the people that demand photoshop in a workplace just want to crop and print pictures of their grandchildren to print out at work, or other simple tasks that gimp could do in 1996. You don't need photoshop to crop, scale or rotate.

    23. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. Color-managed workflow - a must for even a serious amateur
      2. Proper printing (see also 1)
      3. No need to spend numerous hours learning a new UI and workflow
      4. A massive library of plugins
      5. Built-in stitching (used by landscape pros)
      6. GIMP probably doesn't have Smart Filters and some other advanced doodads which have made later CS versions indispensable for those (admittedly few people) who know how to use them

      1. I don't have work that requires rigorous color management so I don't use any such feature from GIMP, but I'll trust that you know what you're talking about.

      Hey, wait a second! What's this, then! That was back in 2.4! Man, I'm going to have to be careful about trusting what you say.

      2. You'll have to say specifically what's missing here.

      3. That's a bogus complaint. I mean, the difficulty of learning a new interface, and even extra awkwardness because of being accustomed to another, is a legitimate issue, but it is not something unique or inherent to GIMP. But an already-learned interface is not something "a professional image editor [has] that GIMP doesn't" -- one still has to learn the interface of closed-source applications. It's a legitimate complaint outside the topic you're addressing.

      4. Is there a specific plug-in capability that you think is lacking in GIMP's large provided-with-app plug-in library or is lacking in the available realm of plug-ins provided by third parties?

      5. That's a pretty specific need. But at a glance I see four different plug-ins for stitching? Why is built-in critical here, especially on the heels of talking up the value of plug-ins?

      6. As far as I can tell this is correct. I mean, Smart Filters. "Other indispensible advanced doodads" is vague, though, innit?

      Any bets on when GIMP gets Smart Filters? Shortly before you start using it, perhaps?

    24. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 1

      20-25 per class, 10 classes per year, over 2 years so far, yes (they would still be more or less anecdotal if you really want to pursue that path), and yes. (WHY did I just answer your essay in my spare time? not sure)

      I think you may be misunderstanding the power of the TANSTAAFL culture, looking at the rest of your comment. From my POV, people like to verify their consumer DNA from time to time; having a Photoshop box on your shelf and a subscription to an overpriced graphics magazine actually does count for something when all the friends come over.

      The most impressively-professional student I had so far was also one of the most ridiculously impressive examples of TANSTAAFL ignorance that I've ever met. He also couldn't figure out how I could design websites with a free text editor and get around paying for Dreamweaver somehow. It felt cheap to him.

    25. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Out of all of my students who can be considered professionals, I've noticed that my students who started out with GIMP and keep using it alongside Photoshop after they learn Photoshop are, as a rule far more professional than all respects than their peers.

      How many of them do web work versus print work?

      Falcon

    26. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      OK, so what does a professional image editor have to have that GIMP doesn't?

      To name two, 16 bit colour channels if not 24 or 32 and CYMK output.

      Falcon

    27. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 1

      They all do a mixture of both, like any photographer would - printing work sometimes, for competitions or art shows, and using their tools of choice for web graphics and website updates at other times. BTW, you know that GIMP's "niche printing issues" would almost never bother a photographer, right? They are not going to be doing pre-press stuff, and most involved with that sort of printing report back to me that their pre-press people keep asking for JPEGs, which...is what it is, I guess.

      The pre-press people I know who would really hate life with GIMP are just about as niched-in as they come, working at places like talented-but-failing T-Shirt printing companies. And I would absolutely hate their job; I watched some friends in that niche use Photoshop once, and it was absolutely painful. I would NEVER in a million years expect serving this niche to be one of GIMP's main priorities.

    28. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read the book? I haven't and I'm curious.

      I'm a professional (and an anonB) and in my career I've used most of the versions of PS. I've used a couple GIMP. What counts is getting results and a product to the customer that meets their needs in form, function and cost.

      GIMP does very well. I'd like to see more people take the time to learn it. Do not 'enthusiastic amateurs' looking to be professional need information to turn what skill they have into a trade? I would prefer to encourage that. If this book offers a wealth of knowledge about one of the few stand-up alternatives to PS then I welcome it and would consider it.

    29. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by skeeto · · Score: 1

      Sorry no, but in your dreams. GIMP is not a professional tool

      I guess being used to produce major films, including Harry Potter, doesn't count as professional?

    30. Re:Subtitle is misleading. by MotorMachineMercenar · · Score: 1

      1. I don't remember which version of GIMP it was, but it was... 3-4 years ago. But yeah, appears GIMP now has color management. How robust and reliable it is I'll have to find out myself - I need ProPhoto as that's what Lightroom spits out (I know you can export in other color spaces but why would I want to lose majority of the color info when it's there). Thanks for pointing this out!

      2. Printing was just not done - no drivers for GIMP/Ubuntu for any serious photo printer (7+ inks) was the killer. Doubt that has been fixed.

      3. It's not. I'm not a pro photog or retoucher, but those who are, it means they have 4-40 hours of lost time to learn the new UI and workflow. That's money they're leaving on the table. Economic times, especially in photography industry, are not conducive to wasting time.

      4. Personally I'd miss PhotoKit Sharpener, which makes the tedious job of sharpening digital photos palatable and fast.

      5. Not an issue for me, I use a stand-alone stitcher (Autopano Pro). Haven't tried the plugins, but sounds promising for those who rely on PS.

      6. Advanced doodads includes numerous little tools and filters, from the top of my head spot healing, patching tool, history brush, some advanced layer blending modes, some advanced channel manipulation modes, HSL color space. I'm sure some of these can be duplicated in GIMP, but I'm also sure some can't. Depending on the user, these can quickly become a game breaker. I wouldn't want to use a program without spot healing, Smart Filters and certain blending and masking options.

      But good points, thanks. It's been a while since I've tried it, and I think it's time to try it again before plunking a thousand or so euros for UPGRADE to CS4 (I don't think I'm exaggerating much on the price).

      --
      "We have an A-Bomb...what more do you want, mermaids?" --I.I. Rabi, speaking in defense of Robert Oppenheimer
  22. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That may be so, but with all those windows and the redundant access to functions, it just adds unneeded complexity and confusion.And if you have an email client open, browser and a file browser open, you have a very busy desktop and taskbar.

    Giving The Gimp its own virtual desktop considerably eases these problems.

  23. prediction: by lemur3 · · Score: 1

    there will nearly be as many usages of the word 'photoshop' as there will be 'gimp' for this story

  24. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Want to move your gimp session to a different virtual desktop? must move at least 3 windows. what a pain in the ass.

  25. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The GIMP's UI is what keeping most of the potential users from using it.

    Maybe a Photoshop UI compatibility mode for GIMP would help.

  26. About the actual book... by VoxMagis · · Score: 1

    I am NOT an artist, photographer or other graphic professional, but I have had serious need to act like one in my job.

    I didn't want to buy a giant commercial package, because I didn't need that kind of investment in occasional products. The Gimp to the rescue!

    The book, for someone like me, was vital to actually learning and using the tools available, and really gave me a chance to understand what I was doing as I learned how to do things.

    --
    -- I really need to bleed off some of this /. karma.
  27. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by MrEricSir · · Score: 1

    That's what I do on Linux. But on Windows, that's obviously not an option (at least not without virtual desktop software, which comes with its own set of problems.)

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  28. What is the book's license? by kfogel · · Score: 1

    A lot of free software documentation is released under free licenses these days. Was this? Or maybe a non-free but still liberal license like CreativeCommons Attribution-NonCommercial or something?

    (Might be good to tweak the Slashdot book review guidelines to make stating the license a standard part of these reviews...)

    --
    http://www.red-bean.com/kfogel
  29. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Skrynesaver · · Score: 2, Interesting

    check out gimpshop.

    --
    "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
  30. How to move a part of the image by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Select a part of the image with a selection tool.
    2. Click and drag the selected part.
    3. You probably thought the selected part will be moved? Nope. It's the selection which got moved.
    4. OK, let's try to move it with CTRL or ALT. No, it still does something else.
    5. Ah, the 'Move' tool. Finally you can move those tricky pixels! Wait, the whole layer got moved instead, oh shi...
    6. ???
    7. F**k it, fire up Photoshop.

  31. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by metageek · · Score: 0

    it needs a proper UI.

    excuse me, PS needs a proper UI too!

    --
    metageek
  32. Gimp is good! by Mantrid · · Score: 1

    I've been using Gimp (on Windows) for quite awhile, even use it for some 2D games and such. It's actually fairly easy to use. Now I've actually managed to click with Blender...tried it a few times over the years and I just couldn't quite "get it". But now that I'm rolling along with that it's quite exciting to be able to do so much for free! Especially since Autodesk seems to own everything else; so it doesn't look like affordable commercial packages will be out any time soon. I may have to donate to both of the projects, assuming they take donations. I own Zbrush 3, which looks like to will work well with Blender now that I know what I'm doing (somewhat). Yay OSS! Still using Windows there, so :P

  33. Astroturf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adobe must be scared to send its astroturfers here.

    (There: this post as unfounded and baseless as yours)

  34. UI needs work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing beats Gimp on Linux but in Windows I'm a fan of Paint.NET over Gimp just because the interface works better for me.

    1. Re:UI needs work. by Xtravar · · Score: 1

      There's Paint.NET for mono. I haven't tried it yet, but I should since I just avoid image editing altogether in Linux because I hate dealing with GIMP.

      http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2007/May-15-1.html

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
  35. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    [Gimp] needs a proper UI.

    And just what do you think is "improper" about the one it has now?

    the multiple windows. It interferes with multiple desktops, other app windows and some focus policies, that regularly get me to select the wrong image or present the options for a tool in a window below the image (so I go window hunting).
    And yes, I use only Gimp, have used it for numerous many projects, I use more than the average 25% of its features, know many keyboard shortcuts, and am a total Linux fan (have nothing else at home).
    It should be a docking app, like Eclipse, Kdevelop, Karbon, and ... Photoshop.

  36. An even better way to go... by bgspence · · Score: 1

    Drawing with a mouse is like drawing with a brick. You need a graphics tablet.

    Just get something like this http://www.amazon.com/Bamboo-Small-Tablet-Graphics-Software/dp/B000V9NU2A/ref=pd_bbs_sr_6?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1237396057&sr=8-6 for less than $100 and you get Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 Win/4.0 Mac, Corel Painter Essentials 4.0, and Nik Color Efex Pro 2.0 GE included for free.

    It's not CS4, but much cleaner than the Gimp.

    Get the Gimp if you want to program, get some graphics software and a tablet if you need to draw.

    1. Re:An even better way to go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      humm...
      Like this:
      http://filsd.deviantart.com/art/Isabella-B-and-W-58721618 ?
      or like this:
      http://filsd.deviantart.com/art/Aryanneh-56651657

      or maybe this:
      http://www.eduardodamasceno.com/
      http://www.mozartcouto.com.br/ (not all made in GIMP on this one, but various...)

      All made with GIMP. So... GIMP is great for digital art.

    2. Re:An even better way to go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda like these drawings prove MS Paint is great for digital art? (link worth checking for the Cave Story pic alone!)

      With enough patience (and skill) you can do great stuff with pretty much any piece of soft.

  37. Re:Great book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    man you really love to push that silly rpg site don't you?

  38. Re:Great book by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Stop spamming that stupid fucking site, moron.

    --
    "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
  39. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by MrHanky · · Score: 1

    Gimpshop is a disgustingly stupid attempt at reimplementing Gimp in an MDI. It's like a bicycle with a helicopter interface: awkward and doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Also, it's several years outdated.

  40. Re:First 5 Chapters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Press "F".

    Works in CS3 and 4, probably also older versions, but that's too far back for me to remember.

  41. The barrier by westlake · · Score: 1

    "Beginning GIMP." "The GIMP for Dummies." You can't help it. You just cringe.

  42. Possible titles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. The Master's Manual: A Handbook of GIMP Dominance
    2. How to be Kinky: A Beginner's Guide to GIMP
    3. Safe Word: GIMP
    4. GIMP Protocols: Handbook for the female slave
    5. SM 101: GIMP, a realistic introduction
    6. Beginning GIMP: From Novice to Professional

  43. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How exactly is this any different than MDI?

  44. LOL-Ha-Ha! by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Good one.

    Nope... It is ye good olde:

    "All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
    electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval
    system, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner and the publisher."

    Even the "downloadable sample chapter"

    Incidentally - it is also interesting to point out that it is printed and bound in China.
    By adequately payed and humanely treated Chinese workers. Probably. Maybe.

     

     
    It was written and printed to be sold for MONEY.
    Not because someone woke up one morning and said to themselves "My-my... world could sure use a book about that free piece of software, and who better than me to write it - ME an Expert in writing such books.".

    And if you want something sold for money, by people who sell such things - you go with the most common copyright.
    If you want to sell the book yourself or let your friends sell it for you - you go with whichever license you like.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  45. Cognitive Dissonance by drooling-dog · · Score: 1

    It's worthless to a professional.

    Oops - Sounds like someone just dropped some major dollarage on PS!

  46. Re:Great book by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

    To anyone with mod points:

    This slashdot user (jetsci) posts on slashdot solely to publicize wittyrpg.

    I'm surprised this post got an informative mod (what doe sit tell us? That GIMP is useful for image manipulation on non-Windows machines?), but kindly please mod it back down to oblivion so we don't need to keep reading yet another crap most meant just to get a link on slashdot.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  47. I wanted to draw a circle ... by rs232 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Enough with the 'I wanted to draw a circle' FUD .. go home MS astroturfers your shift is up ..

    --
    davecb5620@gmail.com
    1. Re:I wanted to draw a circle ... by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      As is yours, gimp apologist (See, i can make baseless accusations too)

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
  48. Re:Great book by balor · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Accidentally modded this informative. I'd rather not mod something up that is advertising violation of copyright.

  49. Yeah, but I'm cheap... by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1

    My point being, how much would it cost me WITHOUT "Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 Win/4.0 Mac, Corel Painter Essentials 4.0, and Nik Color Efex Pro 2.0 GE"

    Because, you see, I don't need them...And I must somehow pay for them along with the tablet, because except for FOSS, there is no free beer...

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
    1. Re:Yeah, but I'm cheap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My point being, how much would it cost me WITHOUT "Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 Win/4.0 Mac, Corel Painter Essentials 4.0, and Nik Color Efex Pro 2.0 GE"

      Because, you see, I don't need them...And I must somehow pay for them along with the tablet, because except for FOSS, there is no free beer...

      I'm guessing they're free-as-in-beer, because Adobe wants you to upgrade to buying real Photoshop, and are willing to let Wacom bundle in crappy Elements with their starter tablets to get you hooked on the interface.

      It's not like there's a huge amount of money to be made in this kind of basic graphics software, and the marginal cost of providing free copies of software is 0. If you add up the retail cost of all those packages, it'd certainly exceed the price of a Bamboo tablet.

    2. Re:Yeah, but I'm cheap... by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      My point being, how much would it cost me WITHOUT "Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 Win/4.0 Mac, Corel Painter Essentials 4.0, and Nik Color Efex Pro 2.0 GE"

      You wouldn't really pay much less for a tablet if you don't want these programs. Adobe, Corel, and others basically give old versions to hardware makers to try to entice users to upgrade. Look at Photoshop Elements, PE 5 Win/PE 4 Mac comes with a tablet but PE 7 Win as well as PE 5 Mac has been available for a while. I got PE 5 Mac months ago. Painter would be good for me to have but before I buy it, unless it comes with a tablet I buy, I'll try a FOOS program first.

      Falcon

  50. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by aj50 · · Score: 1

    How should the Gimp's GUI look?

    (This is a serious question, I agree with your MDI comments, but am not sure what's so wrong with GIMP's gui as it is now)

    --
    I wish to remain anomalous
  51. And why don't YOU realise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "won't fix" means if you want it fixed, you pay someone to do it.

    So stop whinging.

  52. Thnaks, but it still doesn't work... by mangu · · Score: 1

    using the ellipse select tool, draw your circle.
    open the paths dialog
    click 'selection to path'
    click 'paint along the path'

    Your post is quite informative, but it doesn't help me, for reasons that are very typical of Gimp.

    My Gimp installation is in Brazilian Portuguese language. There are 25 entries in the Dialogs menu, but none that even remotely resembles anything like "path" translated to Portuguese. There is no option in the Preferences menu to change the language to English.

    So, thank you for your helpful attitude, but unfortunately it didn't solve my problem. And I've found that this is very typical of the convoluted Gimp user interface. Year ago I read "Grokking the Gimp", and did some work based on what I read there. But there were always those problems. First, the instructions are in English, the Gimp is localized, there's no clear way to find the corresponding menus in the international version. Second, items are frequently moved from one menu to the other in different versions. Unless you have the exact Gimp version the author used, there's no guarantee that you will find the tool you need in the same places.

    It's sad but true, the Gimp needs an intensive reworking in the user interface to become useful, and this situation does not seem to be improving in newer versions.

    1. Re:Thnaks, but it still doesn't work... by fl!ptop · · Score: 1

      My Gimp installation is in Brazilian Portuguese language

      the original post i responded to was written in english, so i went with it. had it been written in portuguese, i probably would've passed.

      --
      When you recognize love in another and realize how precious it is, everything else seems so insignificant.
    2. Re:Thnaks, but it still doesn't work... by mangu · · Score: 1

      the original post i responded to was written in english, so i went with it. had it been written in portuguese, i probably would've passed.

      After looking through all the menu items, I found the sequence of commands you mentioned, under the "EDIT" menu, so your post actually helped me after all, thanks again.

      But still, this is a problem with Gimp. There's no denying it, the user interface *IS* confusing. *AND* the (very little) existing documentation is not translated to other languages than English. *PLUS* they move commands from one menu to another, apparently at random, from one version to the next.

      The Gimp would be an awesome graphics editor, if only it would be just a little bit easier to use.

    3. Re:Thnaks, but it still doesn't work... by Max_W · · Score: 1

      It is like getting into Airbus 380's cockpit and complaining that you cannot find the gaz pedal. GIMP is a complicated software for doing complicated things. If you want to give a child possibility to draw circles find something simpler.

  53. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Minozake · · Score: 1

    Not if you sticky the windows, switch, and unsticky.

    --
    http://sourcemage.org/ - Have fun :)
  54. Thank you! note by Max_W · · Score: 1
    I use GIMP www.gimp.org daily. I have to handle about 300-400 photos per week. Sometimes more. I have got a choice of any graphic software, but GIMP just rocks.

    It can be adjusted for very fast work, and its algorithms are clear and magical. It is one of the best machines on Earth. I see it also like sort of a poem written in code. I would like to thank the developers, artists and documenters of GIMP (2.6.5 already):

    * Spencer Kimball * Peter Mattis

    * Henrik Brix Andersen * Nicola Archibald * Hans Breuer * Simon Budig * João S. O. Bueno Calligaris * Seth Burgess * Stephane Chauveau * Zbigniew Chyla * David Costanzo * Jay Cox * Kevin Cozens * Karine Delvare * Daniel Egger * Pedro Alonso Ferrer * Piotr Filiciak * Shlomi Fish * Sylvain Foret * Gerald Friedland * Daniel Richard G * GG * Saul Goode * David Gowers * Dov Grobgeld * Michael Hammel * Robert Helgesson * Kristian Jantz * Róman Joost * Geert Jordaens * Aurimas Juska * Øyvind Kolås * Robert L Krawitz * Eric Lamarque * Tobias Lenz * Frederic Leroy * Adrian Likins * Tor Lillqvist * Kjartan Maraas * John Marshall * Loren Merritt * Chris Mohler * Chris Moller * Tim Mooney * Adam D Moss * Michael Natterer * David Neary * Sven Neumann * Martin Nordholts * David Odin * Robert Ögren * Akkana Peck * Nils Philippsen * Ari Pollak * Raphaël Quinet * Maurits Rijk * Clarence Risher * Stefan Röllin * Guillermo S. Romero * Michael Schumacher * Peter Sikking * Ted Shaneyfelt * Jernej Simoni * Manish Singh * Mukund Sivaraman * William Skaggs * Kevin Sookocheff * Jakub Steiner * Nathan Summers * Owen Taylor * Patrice Tremblay * Helvetix Victorinox * Matthew Wilson * Karl Günter Wünsch * Yoshinori Yamakawa

    Artists
    Contributing icons, cursors, brushes, gradients, patterns, etc.

    * Lapo Calamandrei * Paul Davey * Karl La Rocca * Andreas Nilsson * Carol Spears * Jakub Steiner * William Szilveszter

    Documenters
    Contributing documentation

    * Marco Ciampa * Dust * Ulf-D. Ehlert * Alessandro Falappa * Jakub Friedl * Michael Hammel * Julien Hardelin * Róman Joost * Hans de Jonge * Semka Kuloviæ-Debals * Manuel Quiñones * Nickolay V. Shmyrev * Axel Wernicke

    Special thanks to Jernej Simoni for Windows installer.

  55. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Flaimbait? Try "Funny".
    My fault for not using a tilda, I suppose.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  56. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by geekoid · · Score: 1

    A) I was being funny.
    B) Just becasue one thing is a pile of crap, doesn't mean it's OK becasue it's competitor is also a pile of crap.

    C) It is confusing and overwhelming to new users.
    D) It doesn't look 'clean' and it looks dated.
    E) Its MDI is a mess.

    I was just taking a jab at it's reputation. I have only used it maybe a dozen times. Coincidentally I just downloaded a recent version last week. and it still looks worse then VB5

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  57. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    The current one is horrible. By default it opens an empty image window and a toolbox window. If you close either of these two windows the application exits. I with they had never fiddled with the UI. The original one was very good IMO.

  58. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by lordtoran · · Score: 1

    Well, they just seem very hesitant to implement a tabbed single-window UI or much better, move to a decent GUI toolkit like Qt.

    --
    Want to hear the voice of GOD? cat /boot/vmlinuz > /dev/dsp
  59. Gimp doesn't do 16 bits per color channel (yet) by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    And GIMP may never do 16 bit colour channels. It's been almost 10 years since a developer added 16 bit depth per colour channel. But the maintainers of GIMP did not add this capability, so the developer forked it and started Film GIMP now called CinePaint.

    If it could do both of these it would meet all my professional needs.

    Have you tried CinePaint? I'm using Mac OS X now and though there's a version of CinePaint for OS X it's not native and needs X11. Unfortunately I haven't been able to get CinePaint to work so I've been thinking of installing Ubuntu, when the new long term support version comes out, on my Mac. If I do I'll be able to try and see if it will work for me, I want to get into photography. If it works it will save me money but if not then I may end up paying for Photoshop.

  60. GIMP vs Photoshop by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's really interesting how professionals pretty much ignore the GIMP in favor of Photoshop.

    One reason is because GIMP does not do 16 never mind 24 or 32 bits per colour channel. While GIMP's 8 bits per channel works for the web it does not cut it for print. CYMK, cyan, yellow, magenta, and black, output is also needed for print. I think GIMP 2.6 added it but older versions do not offer it. Without these two capabilities, which are important for many pros, pros have little reason to use GIMP.

    On the other hand CinePaint does do them. However many graphics/photography pros use Macs and CinePaint doesn't work well in OS X.

    Falcon

    1. Re:GIMP vs Photoshop by pbhj · · Score: 1

      I think GIMP 2.6 added it but older versions do not offer it. Without these two capabilities, which are important for many pros, pros have little reason to use GIMP.

      On the other hand CinePaint does do them. However many graphics/photography pros use Macs and CinePaint doesn't work well in OS X.

      You seem to be mistakenly conflating professional graphic design with print design - there's this new media called "the web", you may have heard of it, it works on RGB and so CMYK capabilities aren't that important.

      To be honest, I run a small business and GIMP/Inkscape (without colour profiles) work fine for our print advertising. PS would provide no ROI for us - mainly because customers couldn't care less if ads are using Pantone spot colours or not and partly because we use small print runs on digital presses where precise colour match is deprecated in favour of financial value.

      Yes if you're doing solely graphic design, or working for print (in a quality critical sector) then CS4 or CorelX4 is essential.

    2. Re:GIMP vs Photoshop by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      You seem to be mistakenly conflating professional graphic design with print design - there's this new media called "the web", you may have heard of it, it works on RGB and so CMYK capabilities aren't that important.

      No, I have heard of the web, and in some posts I have said colour depth doesn't matter so much for the web. In one post where someone says his students that use both GIMP and PS "as a rule far more professional than all respects than their peers." I ask how many do web vs print work. I also said before that while CYMK is not important on the web it is for print.

      Falcon

    3. Re:GIMP vs Photoshop by pbhj · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and you got pwned in that thread too ...

      joking, joking ... ;0)

      Seriously though he did say all the photogs get asked for JPEG's for prepress and so don't need to worry about proper colour. It's so wrong but that's the way of things.

      Who knows perhaps GIMP will get icc profiles and dynamic filters ... probably when Duke Nukem comes out and raw-tree press stops for ever.

  61. Photoshop on Linux by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    he day Adobe puts CS on Linux is the day GIMP gets a stake driven through its heart. Ad that day can't come too soon, IMHO. I'd love to run CS on a Linux box and be done with Mac AND Windows and run on generic hardware.

    Thanks to a how-to posted yesterday, here's a guide to Installing Photoshop on Ubuntu Linux. However it's for PS 7. Though they can be made to run there are issues with CS.

    I'll definitely buy this book. I dislike GIMP intensely, but knowing it better might take an edge off.

    I won't buy this book as is but if it was about using CinePaint I'd jump on it.

    Falcon

  62. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the multiple windows. It interferes with multiple desktops, other app windows and some focus policies, that regularly get me to select the wrong image or present the options for a tool in a window below the image (so I go window hunting).

    You apparently need a better window manager.

    If you find it interfering with other app windows, put all your GIMP windows on a separate desktop.

    It should be a docking app, like Eclipse, Kdevelop, Karbon, and ... Photoshop.

    Please, please, please no. The fewer of those created, the sooner we can abandon that broken stinking wreck of an interface concept called "MDI".

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
  63. GIMP isn't really made for creating images. by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It says right there in the name it's for manipulation, not drawing/painting.

    Neither was Photoshop, and it's in the name too, "photo". Photoshop was first programmed by a programmer who was an amateur photographer and wanted a way to edit photos.

    Falcon

  64. Ubuntu by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    I used GIMP when I really wanted to move entirely to Ubuntu. But points 1, 2 and 6 broke GIMP for me. I hate sticking to XP just so I can have PS, but that's the price I have to pay to have proper photo editing.

    If you're using Ubuntu have you tried CinePaint? I don't know if it meets your requirements but it may.

    Falcon

  65. what is missing from GIMP? by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Support for color modes other than greyscale and RGB, for one thing.

    Those will come soon, and if you're not doing print or broadcast work, that isn't such a big deal.

    Is that the same "come soon" as when 16 bit colour channels are "coming soon"? Ten years after 16 bit colour channels were offered GIMP still doesn't have it.

    Falcon

  66. Drawing with a mouse is like drawing with a brick. by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    You need a graphics tablet.

    I've thought about getting a Bamboo tablet, and if Wacom makes a larger one I might get it. Outside a tablet, instead of a mouse you want a trackball. I've got two Logitech Trackman Wheel Opticals, one on my desk and the other in my laptop bag.

    Falcon

  67. One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am going to save you a lot of time and hassle and hate and headaches.
    One word.
    "point to focus"

    Drink the kool-aid man, it's really good.

  68. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Heather+D · · Score: 1

    Something like Krita perhaps? That looks promising.

  69. Re:Gimp doesn't need a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the multiple windows. It interferes with multiple desktops, other app windows and some focus policies, that regularly get me to select the wrong image or present the options for a tool in a window below the image (so I go window hunting).

    You apparently need a better window manager.

    One that will auto-arrange windows in non-overlapping fashion for me, that will not put dialogs for tool parameters at random places when the screen is full, and that will remove all these redundant window borders that eat up screen estate, and that will let me resize 2 windows atr the same time when I resize the main image window ??? Or that it auto-focuses windows only if it's not one that depends on a random set of others ? (that is what happens to me, when I switch tools with mouse, I fly over another image window and it gets focus).

    If you find it interfering with other app windows, put all your GIMP windows on a separate desktop.

    This is pretty much a case for ... MDI! Just using windows and a virtual desktop.

    It should be a docking app, like Eclipse, Kdevelop, Karbon, and ... Photoshop.

    Please, please, please no. The fewer of those created, the sooner we can abandon that broken stinking wreck of an interface concept called "MDI".

    I feel that MDI is still see as the early attempts in Windows 3.11 where you have something like "internal windows". That part really sucks. true. But having all the tools etc. around the image in such a way that they never overlap, that you have no thick borders that eat up space, that you can move the split easily: yes, that is a much better alternative to what Gimp has, or even worse, what scribus has (with appearing/disappearing toolbox windows).

  70. Useful book by bpeer123 · · Score: 1
  71. GIMP by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    BTW, you know that GIMP's "niche printing issues" would almost never bother a photographer, right?

    Other than GIMP not being capable of more than 8 bits per colour channel, I don't know or recall about GIMP's "niche printing issues".

    I really want to try CinePaint but I haven't found an online tutorial on using it, even CinePaint's online tutorial does not say how to use it. And unlike GIMP for which there are books, including the one being reviewed here, I haven't been able to find one for CinePaint. If you search Amazon books you get some results for it but they are about Linux and only mention CinePaint. Bookpool shows none. Searching Google for cinepiant books shows books on GIMP but not CinePaint.

    Falcon