GIMP Developers Outline Plan For 2019 (gimp.org) 170
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.
A plan? (Score:3, Funny)
The fact that GIMP developers can actually formulate a plan is the real news here.
Yeah they're busy with their innovations... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting how open source projects get into a situation where a lot of people agree that they need some basic usability fixes, but no-one wants to actually do them.
In my (limited) experience it's often because the barrier to entry for contributing improvements is extremely high. Some would say that's to maintain quality, but often it's not because of demanding standards or even lack of resources for code review (hi libusb), but simply the complexity of the code and the time cost of getting started ma
Re: (Score:2)
Question for the developpers of GIMP (Score:4, Interesting)
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?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you RTFA you would see the blog post specifically call out the ability to do smart colorization of inked drawings.
If it doesn't include... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
What if they just skipped the blackjack? Would that be enough to interest you?
#1 upgrade: (Score:1)
Ditch that clunky GTK API! I mean, that idiots that made that should be exiled and forced to work on developing a graphics application with it. I bet it would wind up as much as an abomination at GTK! ;)
(psst... hey captain whoosh, GTK was made by GIMP devs for GIMP)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Pixelmator (Score:2)
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 ".
Need those adjustment layers (Score:3)
then we'll be set
Nice (Score:2)
So they're saying they'll have CMYK usable by the time print is officially dead?
Shills (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Shills (Score:5, Insightful)
I honestly do not understand why GIMP gets so much hate.
Is it a little awkward to use? Yes, but so is Photoshop if you don't know how to use it. Is it less feature rich than Photoshop? Absolutely.
But it's also 100% cheaper and sufficient for the majority of casual image editing.
How disheartening is it to see Slashdot of all places shit all over the FOSS alternative to Photoshop.
Re: (Score:3)
From my experience it's even more awkward to use than most basic image editors. The point is that for many use cases an image editor like Paint .Net is good enough, where GIMP is much more complicated. And most (semi)professionals would rather use a cracked version of Photoshop. For most users GIMP is more like an overcomplicated and unintuitive version of Ms Paint where the basic functionality, such as lines/circles/rectangles in toolbar, is missing.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the problem, GIMP isn't usually the right tool for both basic and more advanced tasks. Even for semi professionals it has usability problems. GNU/Linux didn't conquered the consumer world for similar reasons - it's only targeted for "professionals". The developers are too arroga
Re: (Score:2)
Is it a little awkward to use? Yes, but so is Photoshop if you don't know how to use it.
No that's not the issue here. All software is awkward to use if you don't know how to use it. The key is that Photoshop is not awkward to use if you have used other image editing software. If you learnt Photoshop you can pick up Paint.NET and everything would be and work like you expect it to.
GIMP isn't awkward to use, it's different from everything else for having a learning curve that shouldn't exist someone who has used advanced image editing software before. And likewise becoming an expert at GIMP will
Re: (Score:2)
...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?...
After losing the ability to save anything other than xcf and seeing their reaction to complaints about it I'm not sure a cup of coffee will do the trick. Be better advised to put effort into Krita.
Script Fu at startup (Score:3)
Re: Script Fu at startup (Score:2)
Re: Script Fu at startup (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Script Fu at startup (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks for another stereotypical Slashdot response: "I can't actually address the point so I'll take a swipe at the person."
If there's one thing that never changes around here - and I've been here since just about the beginning - is that when folks are seeking feedback about something, they only want a friendly pat on the head. Any feedback that requires any introspection or actual change is met with hostility.
As an occasional, non-professional user of Gimp, startup could be faster out of the box. This i
Re: (Score:3)
No that is bull. What he is asking for is perfectly reasonable: defer loading stuff until it is first used! This cannot be fixed by changing the configuration (other than I guess making there not be any plugins, which seems to be what you are suggesting).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's still miles better than any other free image editor.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
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 i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: good design is too difficult (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: good design is too difficult (Score:2)
Believing as you do that software that is more than moderately complicated can
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:5, Informative)
GIMP users have the same problem with Photoshop, I assure you.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just that everyone got used to the way Adobe does it.
No. It's that everyone *adopted* it.
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:2)
Who else adopted it? I've literally never seen an app with an interface like CS.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:2)
You're a moron. Photoshop takes longer to startup than GIMP.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:2)
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).
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:1)
Paint.net is nice but itâ(TM)s only available for Windows.
Re:Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
If they don't make it suck more I'll happily settle for that.
Re: Duh GIMP is lousy. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
1) Make it suck less.
There. That should be sufficient to have them stay busy for years.
Agreed. Over the years I've tried to use GIMP with limited success, mostly because the UI is retarded, as is the workflow.
Simple things like cut and paste do not work like they do in 99% of all other image editing software programs. You should be able to select an area and then work with it- fill it, move it, cut it, etc etc. But you can't- everything is a 20-step process and it's infuriating as hell.
So yeah, using GIMP is painful and frustrating. If it's any consolation, it's even worse on the Mac that I'm
Re:How about a less offensive title? (Score:5, Insightful)
How about taking your virtue signalling SJW bullshit somewhere else?
Re: (Score:2)
I can assure you that people who complain about the GIMP name are not what you call "SJW". Likely the exact opposite.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
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?
Re: (Score:1)
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
Name suggestions from other /. users (Score:3)
In the past, other Slashdot users have suggested replacement names [slashdot.org]:
- 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)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, who actually gives a shit? Show me the army of upset disabled people or people with questionable fetishes upset over the name. The only people I see whining are are leftist virtue signalling SJW bitches. And I don't care if they use the same image editor I do.
I don't write code for the project but it's disgusting that people think they get to impose their moral righteousness bullshit on others. You people are no better than Christian Nationalists republicans. Liberty is more important than y
Re: (Score:1)
The fact that you think the people complaining about this name are "SJW"s says a lot. I can assure you the complainers are the exact opposite political persuasion.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: How about a less offensive title? (Score:1)
Offense is something that is taken, not given. Stop taking offense from people.
Re: How about a less offensive title? (Score:2)
Re:How about a less offensive title? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: How about a less offensive title? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Change all instances of GIMP to XKCD.
Compile.
Profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: Fuck GIMP and its users. (Score:3)
Not free, but not that pricy.
Re: (Score:2)
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 int
Re: Fuck GIMP and its users. (Score:3)
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.
Re: Fuck GIMP and its users. (Score:2)
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.
Re: Fuck GIMP and its users. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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 repl
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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.