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

131–140 of 177 posts

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#131

Post by npteljes »

homarp wrote: post #86
npteljes wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gimp is nearing 30 years old, and it has been used for at most a handful of animation movies. I think, regarding its usage, that this is more of an outlier, than a main purpose of the software. So I don't think that this example refutes OP's point.

and I think otherwise https://girinstud.io/news/2018/04/zemarmot-main-contributor-...

I do know about the movie, and having one (upcoming even) movie being made about GIMP doesn't say anything about its usage, or it not being made for coders. Being made for coders is a bad claim as well, at most, it's a jab at its user interface, which, I think, is no worse then Photoshop's by the way, it's just that people are familiar with one, and the not the other.

A good refutal of the for-coders claim would be that it's one of the default image editor most commonly included with major Linux distributions. That's a much larger thing than it being just made for coders.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#132

Post by zahlman »

jrm4 wrote: post #94

Will continue to say it, this piece of software that could be a mainstream huge deal, a straight-up Adobe killer, will never do this unless it changes its name. I've mostly given up hope on this, but it's still wild that people who work on the software just seem to very stubbornly not understand this. Whether you want to blame it on ableism, or perhaps simply "you should name your software after something/someone ski…

Doesn't seem to have caused a problem for Git. Probably didn't for LAME, either, granted MP3 seems to be falling by the wayside now.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#133

Post by npteljes »

prox wrote: post #5
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…

I would love Gimp to succeed but Gimp is made by coders for coders (as you might expect from a open source program) and not by visual artists for visual artists. I don’t have a lot of hope. For years I have been using Affinity and it’s been really good, haven’t looked back. Unfortunately it’s not on linux.

It's not made for coders, it's made for the benefit of whomever uses it, and many people use and bundle it as well. I do understand the issues that people are experiencing with it UX-wise, but the answer to that is not that it's being made for coders, it's that it's an open source project, and as such, it has other incentives, than giving the best UX possible. Also, since it's open source and not for-profit, it has other circumstances than proprietary projects do. For-profit projects live and die on profit, and for b2c profit, you have to have good UX (like Affinity), or for b2b, good connections (like Cerner, or Windows). What open source projects need is being able to hold their main contributor's attention and dedication to the project. Entirely different ballgame. And, yes, very different UX as well. I also stopped fiddling with GIMP - what I do I can do 10 times faster in f** Photopea of all software.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#134

Post by [deleted] »

jrm4 wrote: post #94

Will continue to say it, this piece of software that could be a mainstream huge deal, a straight-up Adobe killer, will never do this unless it changes its name. I've mostly given up hope on this, but it's still wild that people who work on the software just seem to very stubbornly not understand this. Whether you want to blame it on ableism, or perhaps simply "you should name your software after something/someone ski…

[deleted]

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#135

Post by zahlman »

chongli wrote: post #113
enriquto wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> his piece of software (...) will never do this unless it changes its name. Why? Honestly, why? As a non-native English speaker (like the vast majority of people in this planet), the word "gimp" to me means "the free software image processing program". If I search google, duckduckgo, bing, whatever, the entire first page of results refers to that very program. Digging deeper, I start to find some references to the P…

A gimp is a man dressed in a bondage suit used for BDSM sexual roleplay. Gimps are considered inappropriate to even talk about in school and business settings. The GIMP software might as well have the name of a curse word like fuck or shit as far as its appropriateness in public discourse goes.

Or many, many other things (https://www.wordnik.com/words/gimp).

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#136

Post by thanatos519 »

aezart wrote: post #109

I tried 3.0 RC2 the other day and discovered that the new UI is much less space efficient. It imported my panel layout from 2.10 (which I spent a long time getting just right), and I had to completely rearrange it to get it to fit on a 1080px tall monitor. Very frustrating. Also, it doesn't detect my drawing tablet.

I recently moved from an old Ubuntu MATE to Debian Trixie Cinnamon with 2.0 UI scaling and had the same problem. I overrode this with the environment variable GDK_SCALE=1 for GIMP and was able to more-or-less duplicate the previous compactness.

The theme might have helped too - I am using Yaru-cinnamon-dark. Some themes are truly wonky, with objects changing size and forcing re-layout on hover. WTaF that should not even be possible!

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#137

Post by capitainenemo »

billfruit wrote: post #41
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…

In a recent attempt to use Gimp for a small project, a few features I found were lacking: 1. Viewing the layer boundaries of all layers. Very helpful in seeing the total layout of the project. 2. Select multiple layers and do operations like move/align.

You can move multiple layers if they are in a layer group, at least in gimp 2.10

The group also shows the outline of the bounding box of all layers in it, although that's not quite the same as the layer outlines ofc.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#138

Post by zahlman »

crtasm wrote: post #72
DonnieBurger wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

BBC isn't a great comparison - it's an initialism, not read or said as a word. I can't think of an acronym example though.

And the embarrassing meaning that some might attribute to "BBC" is also an initialism.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#139

Post by pessimizer »

LouisSayers wrote: post #105

Serious question: Has anyone proficient in Photoshop given GIMP a proper go and come out the other side wanting to use it?

I worked in prepress, so pretty good an Photoshop, and vastly prefer GIMP. The problems with GIMP are technical, there are some necessary things for some jobs that it simply hasn't been able to do, but I'm seeing a lot of work being done on them.

The problem with GIMP in industry is 1) that .psd is a standard, and 2) that Photoshop has a bad UI that takes a lot of work to understand well enough to do the very fine work most people are doing with it. Nobody would want to start over even if the consensus was that GIMP was better than Photoshop; Photoshop would still be good enough.

Hopefully Adobe will be user-hostile enough to lose a bunch of people to Affinity, and a bunch of people on Affinity will weaken Adobe standards in industry generally. GIMP could sneak in on the back of that.

GIMP is Free Software, it only gains features, never loses them. In the long term, there's no way anyone else can compete.

Re: Writing a Gimp 3.0 Plugin

#140

Post by usrusr »

jrm4 wrote: post #94

Will continue to say it, this piece of software that could be a mainstream huge deal, a straight-up Adobe killer, will never do this unless it changes its name. I've mostly given up hope on this, but it's still wild that people who work on the software just seem to very stubbornly not understand this. Whether you want to blame it on ableism, or perhaps simply "you should name your software after something/someone ski…

It's certainly not all that much of an Adobe killer in places where English isn't a first language. And where English is only a second language, the software is the first thing that comes to mind, by far. "Those letters also have a different use in English" comes at a distant second. To second language English speakers (and perhaps even to first language speakers in some regions, but that's pure speculation on my side), that knowledge is more like odd trivia about the software than a hindrance to adaption.
Post reply on HN