Slashdot Mirror
GIMP Developers Outline Plan For 2019 (gimp.org)
The GIMP developers on Wednesday published a blog post in which they look back at the year 2018 (release of GIMP 2.10) and outline the things that they intend to get around this year. From the post: We expect to be shipping 2.10.x updates throughout 2019, starting with the version 2.10.10 currently expected in January/February. This version will feature faster layer groups rendering, smart colorization with the Bucket Fill tool, and various usability improvements. We are also planning the first unstable release of GIMP that will have version 2.99.2, eventually leading up to version 3.0. The prerequisite for releasing that version will be the completion of the space invasion. ZeMarmot project (which can be supported on Patreon or Tipeee) is also planning to focus a bit more on better canvas interactions, as well as animation support improvements, starting from merging existing work. On the GEGL and babl front, we expect to continue working towards better CMYK support and performance.
It's still miles better than any other free image editor.
The fact that GIMP developers can actually formulate a plan is the real news here.
That applies to pretty much all software, especially the kind you pay for. GIMP is very feature full, useful, and improving steadily, and oh yeah, FREE as in beer. If you want to accelerate its development, donate some cash, coding help, or STFU and leave it alone.
How about taking your virtue signalling SJW bullshit somewhere else?
...but refuse to fix basic usability issues like missing lines/rectangles/rounds from GUI mode.
We have seen in the last few years many advances of Computer Vision and Machine Learning tools to do segmentation, anime drawing colorization, night picture to day picture conversion, changing meteo conditions, and so on.
Do the GIMP developpers intend to include tools of that sort in the project?
If it doesn't include hookers and blackjack, I'm not interested.
Beware of the Leopard.
I think for a lot of people wouldn't have a problem, if you used your credit card. The GIMP sucks. But Photoshop is too expensive for average Joe - non professional Image manipulator, who may need a bit more features then Paint.net but will not be using day to day. Paying 50+ dollars per month for a program that you may use once every few weeks just isn't worth it.
Back in them old days of the early 2000's I was able to get legit copy of Photoshop from a third party for about $300 then every 4 years or so I bought the upgrade for a few hundred dollars. The reason why I got the upgrade wasn't for the actual new features, but because it now supported the newer hardware better. Updated OS, 64bit. In general architectural changes that allowed me to process bigger pictures faster.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
If you see someone running GIMP, take their computer away from them, format it, and then install God's one true operating system, Windows 10, and Adobe Photoshop. Use their credit card to buy it as punishment for daring to use something else.
If you want me to use Adobe, you will fucking pay for it.
Paint.net is nice but itâ(TM)s only available for Windows.
Sure, if you don't need any of the features that Gimp has an Paint.NET does not. Not having the same feature set isn't a criticism of Paint.NET, if it floats your boat, then great. Same goes for MS Paint.
Saying that Paint.NET is easier for what you do isn't a very convincing criticism of GIMP; saying that Photoshop is easier for what you do is a more substantial criticism, especially if you've actually spent some time using GIMP rather than marveling at how odd it's UI is.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Photoshop CC, plus some other applications in the package are available for 9.99/month. Not that expensive.
Not free, but not that pricy.
I hate fat people.
Not the initial license, but upgrade licenses for Photoshop were $200 and released every 18 months. Now it is $10/mo, so over those same 18 months the cost is now $180. While 10% cheaper, you're now forced into every single "upgrade" by always paying. No longer can you skip paying versions if they don't have new features for your given workflow. Even if you don't upgrade your local install, you're still paying for those upgrades now. So, call it "Not that expensive" if you want, but they just hooked you into paying endlessly for renting their software that you once could own.
Interesting that *your* mind went there instead of the definition of gimp: twisted silk, worsted, or cotton with cord or wire running through it, used chiefly as upholstery trimming or a fishing line made of silk bound with wire.
Now, why exactly is it your mind jumps to slurs?
Well, being zero-cost is no excuse for having a crappy UI.
What's wrong with the GIMP GUIs? (Note that GUI is pluralized -- GIMP has several standard GUIs -- something that is not easily attainable with proprietary software).
The problem is that designing an intuitive, well set out UI is much more difficult than all the bells'n'whistles functions the developers add to the menus.
If only they would apply their talent to that instead of gratuitously adding more obscure features, they would have a product to be proud of. But UI design is probably beyond their capabilities.
Let me guess -- you're a Mac user who happens to be a usability expert.
It's not free, but it's the perfect in-between image editing software between the "GIMP which is free but has a really weird non-standard way of doing everything" and "Adobe Photoshop which is really expensive or requires monthly fees ".
#DeleteFacebook
then we'll be set
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
In the past, other Slashdot users have suggested replacement names:
- GNU Image Editor (GIE)
- GNU Raster Editing And Touchup (GREAT)
- GNU Image Manipulator (GIM) with soft G to sound like "gym"
- GNU Image Retouching and Editing (GIRE)
- GNU Image Retouching Lab (GIRL)
- GNU Adaptable Image Tool (GAIT)
- GNU Users' Foto FudgER (GUFFER)
I have a coworker on Mac who has a license to use Adobe CS (Photoshop), but who uses GIMP regularly instead. There are a few features you can't get in GIMP, but if you don't need those, it's all what you're used to. And if you intend to automate your work, GIMP blows away Photoshop.
GIMP users have the same problem with Photoshop, I assure you.
So they're saying they'll have CMYK usable by the time print is officially dead?
Unlike all the other posts here, I find GIMP is a reasonably good piece of photo editing software. If you think that it suffers in some way, how about buying the developers a cup of coffee perhaps, or send a patch over for merger?
Complaining about the naming of the software does not cut the mustard. The fact the developers don't spend time pandering to SJW is a good thing, get your mind of out of the gutter.
Why UNIX?
I've read the criticism about Gimp's GUI a lot, but i've learnt graphics using Gimp and it feels pretty consistent to me. Also it has one big advantage over its competitors: it hasn't changed much, meaning I didn't have to relearn everything at every new version. I built up from the knowledge I acquired over the years and I consider myself proficient with Gimp. I don't see the UI hampering my work a single bit.
On a related note, I can't use photoshop because the UI feels weird to me. I'm used to a different way to work now.
Most of GTK is great, the only big issue GTK has is the support for auto-connecting signal handlers to class methods in C++. AKA it can't do it. This makes GTK useless for object oriented programming. Also who the fuck wants to muck around with strings in C? talk about pulling teeth. Even if you just program C++ in C style and only use the string classes from C++ it's a massive step up in usability. Until GTK is useful in other languages than C and Vala it will never be a great tool. QT/KDE has one of the worst looking UIs/widget sets ever. GTK nailed the visual design but blew it on usability in code. What we actually need is a lightweight API like GTK that integrates well into C++ code and has a decent wysiwyg editor for quickly bashing together UI layouts. Glade is almost that tool. The QT equivalent sucks. I've used both. The GTK UIs always come out looking nicer.
I would like to see some simple creature-comfort improvements to improve usability. My first suggestion would be to either not load all the Script-Fu scripts, or to load them in the background, so that I can get to a usable screen faster. Startup is so slow, and much of the time it is because the UI is blocked loading all the scripts (most of which go unused during a session).
Hey, Windows users, there is no such thing as "forward" slash, there is only slash and backslash.
It's GIMP, and is an acronym for the for the GNU Image Manipulation Program. You sound like an idiot when your big complaint is the name of the program is an issue of some kind. Next you'll be saying Firefox suggests animal cruelty and Microsoft reminds you too much of your dick.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Being evidently unable to learn and use a UI is your real problem. There is nothing at all wrong with their UI since they implemented the single window option.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I used to work in cartography years ago and we used to use Photoshop for certain parts of our workflow. At some point I was tasked to look into Photoshop alternatives because management wanted to save the ~$700 per seat cost. Being a Linux user since the mid-90s, I looked at The GIMP. I don't remember exactly why it wasn't as good as Photoshop - I believe it was slower and either didn't support CMYK or had poor support for it. Anyway, I compiled my report and said this was a possible replacement, though not as good for our workflow.
I then had to have the conversation:
--Me: This is the GNU Image Manipulation Program or GIMP
--Boss: What?
--Me: GIMP
--Boss: Why the hell would they call it that?
--Me: Well, it stands for GNU Image Manipulation Program
--Boss: Yeah, but do they know what gimp means?
--Me: Yeah, they'd have to at this point
--Boss: Why don't they change it?
--Me: Hubris or they're trying to be cute
--Boss: We're not using software called GIMP
So it goes. It's a bad name that they use just to be cute and then get defensive over when people don't like it. I'm not a fan of the UI and it had problems back in the day (I haven't had a reason to use it in a long time), but I can give you at least one anecdote where the name directly stopped an organization from using it. It's got nothing to do with snowflakes or SJWs, it's just a bad name in a lot of people's minds.
If they don't make it suck more I'll happily settle for that.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Yes, they should absolutely rename it because your boss is incompetent.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Yep, we're the wusses for not kowtowing to your bullshit and not capitulating due to a screechy vocal minority. Last I checked, the name still stands asshole.
Within the limits imposed by the GTK+ toolkit, it's pretty easy to change the gimp UI to fit your preferences; some of it can even be done without recompiling.
Many of the plug-ins are well written and can be modified by even mediocre programmers to have improved functionality and/or more accurate results.
It's obvious that your attitude is that you'd rather complain bitterly than do anything good.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Get source code.
Change all instances of GIMP to XKCD.
Compile.
Profit.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Gimp loads all the plugins at startup, one file at a time. This is perhaps a poor design choice, but it does give a lot of flexibility for the addition of new plugins.
If it bothers you, try running gimp from a SSD.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Immediately you provide a perfectly reasonable answer to your own question.
No idea if this is still the case, but last time I used it it had windows floating all over the place, rather than a much more comfortable single window with dockable subwindows.
Not sure what the other GUIs are, but the fact that they exist shows that the default is probably terrible. Users don't want to piss about with configuring their software. They want to manipulate images.
"Whining" does help. People want a good, easy to use free image processing application. They are saying why GIMP is not that application. The developers can ignore them if they choose. That's on them.
I've given this some thought; it's an idea I like. However, there are some problems. Rewriting gimp for Qt is a huge job; my estimate is that there's well over 100 Mbyte of source code. Once it's been written, all you'd have is a fork: it's unlikely that gimp.org is going to accept a completely rewritten program. The creator of the fork then has to maintain it, and he'll be missing all the improvements that were in process when the fork goes public but not yet incorporated in the final gimp product. And once it's done, who's going to use it, besides systemd haters like myself?
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Photoshop costs $10/month and you get a few other apps like Lightroom. They update fairly often, it's not a terrible deal really.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
Git the hell out of here. (Spelling is correct.)
GIMP (even 2.8.22) has a single-window mode that docks the two main toolboxes and solves the stupid floating toolbox annoyance that no one has ever liked. Unfortunately, single-window mode is not the default; you must go to the Window menu and check it...which means you have to know it's there to be checked.
Paint.NET is way better to use and it's had less people working on it than Duh GIMP.
I wish wish wish he'd release a version for Linux, but I know that ain't gonna happen in my lifetime (for understandable reasons).
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
1. Gimp is an image manipulation program, not primarily a drawing program. You're trying to mow a lawn with a shovel.
2. Think first. There are several ways to draw circles, using tools like elliptical select and/or the filled circle brush.
3. In the FX-Foundry plugin, FX-Foundry -> Shapes -> Parametric -> Ellipse. Alas, it's not very good.
4. Here's a direct method.
Make a new layer.
Choose the filled circle brush.
Click on the pencil tool. Choose a size (diameter).
In the image, click where you want the center of the circle. Remember that location. Now you have a filled circle.
Click on the eraser tool. Reduce the size by 2.
In the image, click on the center of the filled circle. Now you have a circle with a thickness of 1 pixel.
Merge down the new layer to put the circle on the previous top layer.
Reading it, it looks like a lot of work, but it's not. It takes less than 2 minutes. It's inconvenient, but it's easy and straightforward.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
You're a moron. Photoshop takes longer to startup than GIMP.
He's not a graphics artist. He's an iOS developer. And guess what? Most people who use Photoshop are amateurs who aren't graphics artists.
I can assure you that people who complain about the GIMP name are not what you call "SJW". Likely the exact opposite.
People who ignore criticism in this way are doomed to failure.
If people can't pick up and use a UI immediately, then a possible reason is that the UI is not very good rather than the users being wrong.
I was able to pick it up just fine. Of course I am smart enough to know that when you learn a complex piece of software you don't just open it, point and click and hope for the best. You read the fucking documentation, and at least one quality book that gets into how the UI works *and* the underlying principles that are needed to be able to fully grasp the design and understand the decisions made by the team to do it that way.
Believing as you do that software that is more than moderately complicated can quickly learned, with or without putting in the proper time and effort using all the proper resources
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Most people figure out how to use Photoshop without a manual. Sure sometimes software is complicated and does need to be explained, but here this seems to be being used as an excuse.
but i've learnt graphics using Gimp and it feels pretty consistent to me.
That is why you don't understand it. It's also why you're limited as a result. The thing about Photoshop's UI is not that it's different from GIMP's, but rather that the UI is more similar to that of every other product on the market and fits into a larger ecosystem.
There's no problem with being unique unless you're in an industry where uniqueness is not appreciated. That's where the criticism from GIMP's perfectly functional UI comes from. You can seamlessly jump between Photoshop, Paint.NET, and CorelDraw with ease. Not so with GIMP.
GIMP users have the same problem with Photoshop, I assure you.
GIMP users would. Paint.Net users would not. CorelDraw users would not. It's worth remembering GIMP's criticisms isn't that it's UI isn't functional, it's that it is unique in the industry.
Photoshop takes longer to startup than GIMP.
Huh? Who cares about startup? GIMP is noticeably slower at actually working with images especially large ones.
Oh and no it isn't, both start within seconds of each other, but Photoshop wins on my system.
The AC brought it up. I can't remember the last time I ran some GIMP operation and it took long enough to notice or interfere with my work. Maybe you are comparing GIMP on Mac (which is probably slower than Linux) or comparing a powerful Mac with a weak PC?
No, GIMP on PC. Not all workloads involve adding a bit of text to a 256x256 image and uploading a creative meme to the internet. For many of the people where speed matters, they have suitable workloads to complain about too. Install them side by side, fire up a 200mpxl image and try yourself, or fire up a smaller image with a shitton of layers.
2 minutes?
Why do most bitmap image programs do circles by clicking on one point (which forms one corner of the circle's bounding box) and then dragging to the opposite corner of the bounding box?
Most of the time that I want to draw a circle I want to click on the centre (usually a well defined place) and then drag out the radius until I can see that it is as big as a I want.
Not such a problem with vector programs like Inkscape - I can slap any ol' circle on the page and then manipulate it to what I want.
No one is claiming you should use GIMP to design a billboard or that there aren't workloads where Photoshop is faster. But 99% of graphics work will not be materially affected by the difference in performance.
Ironically, CS has some features like content-awareness that make Photoshop a better choice for those who don't know what they are doing, but professionals will find GIMP has pretty much all the same features for digital publishing (print being obviously unworkable in GIMP).
Ironically, Photoshop got a lot of the same criticism for its multi-window interface with weird tool windoes. It's just that everyone got used to the way Adobe does it.
Did to notice that GIMP is in all caps, and they are not shorting, you might already know this, but in case you don't, GIMP is an abbreviation for GNU Image Manipulation Program, so no "sex dungeon freak" involved. have a nice day
Hmm jo post AC but give your full name and a rather unspecific job indication. I'm not 100% certain but jo might be a troll, if you are not please difference the law and the jurisdiction in which law enforcement actually enforces it and remeber /. is also read outside the US so unless you are referring to the EULA which may or may not be enforceable (and is not law in a strict sense anyway) good luck getting any enforcement at all. If it was meant as a joke, well played, you got me to waste my time replying. anyway have a nice day
tank you for informing me (tho the post was not directed at me). As these are areas outside my interest i have not googled the other meanings of gimp (and my limited contact with it has been software related)
Note to self: stop posting in this tread you will be taken for a spam boted account, that is generally detrimental to karma
It's just that everyone got used to the way Adobe does it.
No. It's that everyone *adopted* it.
Who else adopted it? I've literally never seen an app with an interface like CS.
Sigh go back to the top and read the thread again. And if you can't find the similarities between the examples already mentioned and how incredibly different they are to GIMP then really there's not much more I can do to help you.