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

Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

schoenitzer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 177 posts

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#61

Post by idle_zealot »

isodev wrote: post #51

It’s time for a new name. “gimp” may be semantically correct but it hardly prepares one for a “friendly and powerful graphics editing tool”.

This is posted every time this software comes up here. I don't know where you people are from, but in my dialect (Eastern US, Gen Z) "gimp" is just not a particularly rude word. It's used primarily as a verb, meaning "to reduce in efficacy, to hamper." Obviously it has it's noun definition too, bit if you think that has anything to do with the lack of adoption of this software you're kidding yourself, you gits.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#62

Post by darkwater »

beezlewax wrote: post #57
isodev wrote: post #51

It’s time for a new name. “gimp” may be semantically correct but it hardly prepares one for a “friendly and powerful graphics editing tool”.

It's fairly idiotic at this stage that this has never been changed. Highly damaging to the products outward appearance.

Then, when the announcement of the name change is on the HN frontpage, tens of HNers will post their anger "the name was already well-known, this is a marketing disaster!! They should know better!"

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#63

Post by cpach »

dp-hackernews wrote: post #20
amelius wrote: post #4

> As with GIMP 2.10, GIMP 3.0 ships with a Python interpreter embedded and will not use the system Python. This is great and I wish this was the same with other tools, like Kicad, Freecad and Inkscape.

You kind of get that sort of thing for free if you use Nix as your package manager, along with home-manager - check the link below for more info https://nixos-and-flakes.thiscute.world/introduction/

True, but this only helps a small fraction of the application’s userbase.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#64

Post by DonnieBurger »

beezlewax wrote: post #57
isodev wrote: post #51

It’s time for a new name. “gimp” may be semantically correct but it hardly prepares one for a “friendly and powerful graphics editing tool”.

It's fairly idiotic at this stage that this has never been changed. Highly damaging to the products outward appearance.

I don't think it's highly damaging. It's an acronym. Is BBC's name highly damaging?

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#65

Post by DonnieBurger »

I'm patiently waiting for resynthesizer to be ported. Then I will make the move to 3.0. I've used GIMP exclusively as my image editor for the past two decades and it has fulfilled my needs for web development. I really don't get all the gripe around it. It's one of the most valuable free programs on my PC. Sure, it does take time and possibly customization to get yourself a comfortable workflow. But once you get it down, you can do basically everything you need with keyboard shortcuts and blaze thru editing really quickly.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#66

Post by isodev »

idle_zealot wrote: post #61
isodev wrote: post #51

It’s time for a new name. “gimp” may be semantically correct but it hardly prepares one for a “friendly and powerful graphics editing tool”.

This is posted every time this software comes up here. I don't know where you people are from, but in my dialect (Eastern US, Gen Z) "gimp" is just not a particularly rude word. It's used primarily as a verb, meaning "to reduce in efficacy, to hamper." Obviously it has it's noun definition too, bit if you think that has anything to do with the lack of adoption of this software you're kidding yourself, you gits.

In places where people speak the other flavours of English, reading the name goes a bit like this:

The first thing that comes to mind is a slang term for someone who is physically disabled or limps. The second thing is that it refers to an insult (someone weak or foolish). Then one starts to wonder if it's a bondage reference... unless one is given additional context, one can never get to a design tool out of this. You wouldn't want people to overhear you say it and misunderstand the situation.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#67

Post by DonnieBurger »

krapp wrote: post #25
n3storm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also remember for million time they will never use it because it doesn't have exact keys as their proprietary contents kidnapper software.

I don't know... it seems to me that most of the complaints about Gimp come from people who actually use it, because people who never use it wouldn't have anything to complain about. It also seems odd to assert that non-contributors have no right to complain on a forum where most people, most of the time, complain about things they have no direct knowledge of nor a hand in making.

I use it almost daily in website content creation. Sure there are quirks, but it's a completely free image editor that can do nearly everything I need. No complaints from me.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#68

Post by pjmlp »

bonoboTP wrote: post #59
pjmlp wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want to draw lines and geometric shapes, without having to deal with paths, like in any other sane graphical program. Has this been finally sorted out?

You might like Pinta. It's my favorite no nonsense image editor for basic drawing and quickly changing stuff. Not for big projects, just editing a few pixels, resizing, brightness, cropping, painting, flood filling, basically classic MS Paint but with layers. It's a fork of Paint.NET, which happens to be my favorite image editor on Windows. The Mono-based port is a bit flaky and crashes sometimes, but the Gimp UX is…

Actually I eventually moved into Paint.NET, and I am mostly on Windows/macOS nowadays.

Thanks for the hint, tough.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#69

Post by iamkonstantin »

DonnieBurger wrote: post #64
beezlewax wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly idiotic at this stage that this has never been changed. Highly damaging to the products outward appearance.

I don't think it's highly damaging. It's an acronym. Is BBC's name highly damaging?

Why would it be? I can't think of a single meaning of BBC which translates to an insult. GIMP on the other hand has more than one meanings as an insult (not even an acronym).

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#70

Post by gloflo »

4k93n2 wrote: post #11
10729287 wrote: post #2

I really want Gimp to succeed. It's a software I've been trying to use since more than 20 years now but the UX is so clunky.... and different than Photoshop. Muscle Memory is a thing. I'm moving my main machine from macOS to Linux (which I also used partially since 20years), moving from a mac mini M1 to a lovely Lenovo M75Q-1 and so far the experience has been great. I'm a (enthusiast) photographer and I have big hop…

gimp became way less annoying once i discovered the command pallette (the forward slash key), you can pretty much do everything with it. i even use it to switch tools sometimes sinces its easier than trying to look through all the tool icons or having to long press them

It was easier when the icons had color and were not grouped into multiple tools behind one icon.
Post reply on HN