Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

gimp.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 174 posts

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#111

Post by jandrese »

fvdessen wrote: post #37
epidemian wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe i'm an outlier, but with zero prior experience in image editing software, i've found GIMP UI much more approachable than Photoshop. With PS i felt that the UI was much more tailored to experts or at least to people that knew what they were doing, whereas with GIMP i found the UI to be more beginner-friendly and discoverable. So yeah, YMMV. What a shocker! :) > Downvote all you want--I know open source can't han…

> Do you genuinely think that the GIMP developers don't want or don't try to make it usable or to improve it as much as they can? Ten years ago they made a call to artists to find out what they could improve, then didn't like the feedback they got and told the artists they were wrong. I guess that's how they got such a user hostile reputation.

I think most of the feedback they got was "copy Photoshop's interface", but I have to agree with some of the other users in this thread that Photoshop's interface can be shockingly non-intuitive in places.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#112

Post by CorpusCalcium »

Karunamon wrote: post #28
avian wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you stop to think that perhaps GIMP's developers are in fact its users? I'm an engineer and I draw as a hobby. I don't mind developer-oriented features in my drawing program. If I wanted Photoshop, I would be using that.

That’s all well and good, but if GIMP is targeting devs first who are also artists, Linux remains an OS without an image editor targeted at artists first. IMO that’s an important hole in the software library that prevents wider adoption.

Very few people can devote the significant time necessary to make free professional-grade stuff just for the sake of a wider audience.

And unless you're an artist who does that yourself, it's a bit much to ask others to meet your needs for free like that in the first place.

If non-dev artists want to see that gap close, they need to contribute, not just wait for mana from heaven.

No, that doesn't have to mean actually writing the software. But it could mean paying someone else to do the coding, even if the software is ultimately released as OSS.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#113

Post by floatboth »

bhaavan wrote: post #3

So still no GTK3? I think when GTK4 is released in a few months, it would be a good time to move to GTK3 as they can still be outdated. I know I am being a bit bitter for an open source project with less funding, but GIMP was supposed to be a poster boy GTK application in the first place.

There is a gtk3 dev branch: https://github.com/GNOME/gimp/tree/gtk3-port-meson — and it actually does work :)

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#114

Post by lovelearning »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #104
lovelearning wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's with the entitlement here? These are people sacrificing their time and going largely unpaid (AFAIK) for their efforts. I for one am happy and grateful that these "dodgy" open source evangelists exist and offer us all a choice for free. If I have a subjective usability problem with their software, far more constructive to take the effort to try and fix it myself than complain like a diva.

What's with the entitlement in thinking that something being open source means its above criticism? Further, people have tried to get usability fixes into GIMP, and been shot down, as "that's not what the project wants to do."

The entitlement I was referring to was based on the tone of the criticism. "I wish Krita had image editing features" wouldn't have got any reply from me. But adding "the open source evangelists always have a dodge" sounds to me like a personal attack on those devs. Do they owe something to the artist community? Or have they breached the terms of some work-for-hire contract from the graphics industry to code an all-in-one tool? Nope.

What is the "dodging" in limiting functional scope of a tool? Each and every software project I know of places some limits on what it will and won't implement. Even Adobe has a suite of tools where one tool like Photoshop can do things Illustrator can't and vice versa. It's not Adobe being "dodgy" about their tools, and nor are open source projects.

Nothing stops people from forking GIMP, implementing whatever fixes they want, distributing, and even selling it. Refusing pull requests is not a crime.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#115

Post by nkkollaw »

slantyyz wrote: post #90
davidy123 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, and it's disappointing people are downvoting you. I ended up having beers with several core GIMP developers a few years ago, and they outright stated that improving usability was not a goal for them, in fact they would rather not have the burden of users who expected it to be easier to use. Speaking for myself, I've found other graphics programs were very intuitive and helped me be very creative, ye…

Is GimpShop still actively maintained to keep up with the latest Gimp (the Gimpshot site is a little vague on these details)? Didn't that provide a decent migration path for PhotoShop users to GIMP?

Looks like it's not maintained anymore, and gimpshop.com is a scam website from someone else (looks like, I might be wrong).

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#116

Post by zzzcpan »

slantyyz wrote: post #89
zzzcpan wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inkscape, mypaint and gimp is pretty much all there is to use professionally on linux. And they complement each other surprisingly well. Inkscape is the main workhorse, mypaint is for sketches and gimp is to prepare some photos and raster images to import into inkscape (you can't do a lot in gimp).

It's been a while since I've used Inkscape to import .ai files, but does Inkscape still have a tendency to mangle them when you try to import them? If you're moving from one platform to another, you want legacy files to import perfectly, especially when you don't have time to convert old Illustrator assets into svg files. On Mac/Windows at least, Affinity Designer was the first app around $50 or under that didn't man…

Yes, you still need to convert to svg for the best result. These things will always be fragile.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#117

Post by nkkollaw »

jandrese wrote: post #111
fvdessen wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you genuinely think that the GIMP developers don't want or don't try to make it usable or to improve it as much as they can? Ten years ago they made a call to artists to find out what they could improve, then didn't like the feedback they got and told the artists they were wrong. I guess that's how they got such a user hostile reputation.

I think most of the feedback they got was "copy Photoshop's interface", but I have to agree with some of the other users in this thread that Photoshop's interface can be shockingly non-intuitive in places.

There are 20 years of corporate-backed work behind Photoshop's UI.

GIMP has nothing but to learn from it. There would be nothing negative about copying it outright.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#118

Post by jandrese »

nkkollaw wrote: post #117
jandrese wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most of the feedback they got was "copy Photoshop's interface", but I have to agree with some of the other users in this thread that Photoshop's interface can be shockingly non-intuitive in places.

There are 20 years of corporate-backed work behind Photoshop's UI. GIMP has nothing but to learn from it. There would be nothing negative about copying it outright.

Yeah, but it's 20 years of Adobe, which is not a company that I highly respect. IMHO there is a good chunk of Photoshop's interface that is the way it is mostly for legacy reasons. Some random programmer thought the feature would be good in buried down in this dialog box off of a vaguely related menu option and it has lived their ever since.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#119

Post by s73v3r_ »

lovelearning wrote: post #114
s73v3r_ wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's with the entitlement in thinking that something being open source means its above criticism? Further, people have tried to get usability fixes into GIMP, and been shot down, as "that's not what the project wants to do."

The entitlement I was referring to was based on the tone of the criticism. "I wish Krita had image editing features" wouldn't have got any reply from me. But adding "the open source evangelists always have a dodge" sounds to me like a personal attack on those devs. Do they owe something to the artist community? Or have they breached the terms of some work-for-hire contract from the graphics industry to code an all-in…

"Nothing stops people from forking GIMP, implementing whatever fixes they want, distributing, and even selling it. Refusing pull requests is not a crime."

To put that up as the solution is to be fully divorced from reality.

Re: GIMP 2.10.0 Release Candidate 1 Released

#120

Post by nkkollaw »

jandrese wrote: post #118
nkkollaw wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 20 years of corporate-backed work behind Photoshop's UI. GIMP has nothing but to learn from it. There would be nothing negative about copying it outright.

Yeah, but it's 20 years of Adobe , which is not a company that I highly respect. IMHO there is a good chunk of Photoshop's interface that is the way it is mostly for legacy reasons. Some random programmer thought the feature would be good in buried down in this dialog box off of a vaguely related menu option and it has lived their ever since.

Adobe is a pretty great company I would think..?

Regardless, I can actually scale objects easily by dragging in Photoshop, at least.

Post reply on HN