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

Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 220 posts

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#211

Post by cmyk_student »

Mashimo wrote: post #203
cmyk_student wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-destructive text outline has been around for a while now: https://www.gimp.org/news/2022/11/18/gimp-2-99-14-released/#... Non-destructive resize works on vector layers and link layers (essentially "smart objects" in GIMP). We have the capability to do this for regular layers too - just need to connect some things and change some internal assumptions about transform filters.

Huh, 2.99 does that mean it was the beta for 3.0? Because I think i have been using stable gimp a few times over the last couple of years and not seen it.

What version of GIMP are you running? Stable GIMP at this point (at least by our definition) is GIMP 3.2, which definitely has this feature. If you've been using 2.10 or earlier, then yeah, it wouldn't be in there.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#212

Post by Mashimo »

cmyk_student wrote: post #211
Mashimo wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, 2.99 does that mean it was the beta for 3.0? Because I think i have been using stable gimp a few times over the last couple of years and not seen it.

What version of GIMP are you running? Stable GIMP at this point (at least by our definition) is GIMP 3.2, which definitely has this feature. If you've been using 2.10 or earlier, then yeah, it wouldn't be in there.

Yeah, but it being in 2.99 / 3.0 means it was only in stable gimp since 2025, so one year ago. That explains why I did not know about it.

But nice to see that they finally added it.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#214

Post by jrm4 »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #185
jrm4 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this. I hate doing "offense aside" but. Offense aside, you can still understand that this is a bad idea without bringing in the spectre of "is it offensive." Like I'm saying elsewhere, what if it was called "Poop-edit" or similar? People would quite reasonably not believe it to be quality software, even if it was.

Poop-edit would get a laugh from me, it already did.

Yes, me too.

And also, no one would USE IT. That's my point. It really is that simple.

I'm not primarily talking about "being offended." Jokes are fine in some contexts.

I'm saying that if you want people to take your software seriously, it needs a serious name. And that the GIMP people very very stupidly missed a huge opportunity by not doing that.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#215

Post by Matl »

NetMageSCW wrote: post #199
Matl wrote: post #106

While all the comments about GIMP needing a total UX overhaul etc. are likely valid, it's worth noting that there's something like 2 people working on the bulk of GIMP at the moment. It's not a startup that has just raised a series A and opened a flashy San Francisco office. All that is to say that I don't think the problem is the GIMP devs not knowing what the problems are and needing them explained over and over ag…

After the attitude displayed by those developers towards e.g. opening jpegs and saving GIMP format files, I don’t think I’m interested in contributing and have replaced using GIMP with Paint.Net and Corel.

I feel like people working on things for free can be cut a little bit of slack and not always be policed about any random person not linking their 'attitude' for some comment on a PR they made or whatnot.

But I guess it's easier to come up with reasons for not contributing than actually contributing.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#216

Post by mattkevan »

cmyk_student wrote: post #194
mattkevan wrote: post #96

Photoshop's interface is getting worse [1] and everyone hates Adobe, so there's a great opportunity for a tool like GIMP to step up and become the default alternative. It's got a lot of features, it's been around for a long time and has reasonable name recognition (for better or worse). However, unless they do a Blender and make a sustained effort to improve the UI, understand what people want and how it fits into pr…

Far from it - we even have a dedicated design site where we ask for UX-specific bug reports and improvement requests from users: https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/GIMP/Design/gimp-ux/-/work_it... We then discuss and test with the reporter and volunteer designers, and try to implement once some consensus has been reached. We welcome feedback from more users, so feel free to contribute your thoughts and design/workflow is…

Ah design by committee, that well known route to design excellence!

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#217

Post by cmyk_student »

mattkevan wrote: post #216
cmyk_student wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Far from it - we even have a dedicated design site where we ask for UX-specific bug reports and improvement requests from users: https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/GIMP/Design/gimp-ux/-/work_it... We then discuss and test with the reporter and volunteer designers, and try to implement once some consensus has been reached. We welcome feedback from more users, so feel free to contribute your thoughts and design/workflow is…

Ah design by committee, that well known route to design excellence!

I believe it's a step up from "design by whichever developer implemented a particular feature", which was the norm. :)

More seriously, we're trying to attract more designers and design feedback, just like we do for coding. We're also trying to document UX standards (see https://developer.gimp.org/core/ for early work) so there'll be a consistent experience as new developers join and features are added.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#218

Post by mixmastamyk »

jrm4 wrote: post #214
mixmastamyk wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poop-edit would get a laugh from me, it already did.

Yes, me too. And also, no one would USE IT. That's my point. It really is that simple. I'm not primarily talking about "being offended." Jokes are fine in some contexts. I'm saying that if you want people to take your software seriously, it needs a serious name. And that the GIMP people very very stupidly missed a huge opportunity by not doing that.

But I’ve been using gimp productively for almost thirty years, late 90s on SGI. At no point was the name a factor. Can’t force them to change it either.

And in the dictionary I found at least one quite positive definition. Sometimes word have conflicting meanings and we deal with that successfully every day.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#219

Post by mixmastamyk »

iamcalledrob wrote: post #107
thisislife2 wrote: post #67

The argument over the UI in GIMP and Photoshop is actually based on the kind of "false" premise that Photoshop has a "superior" UI. It reminds of my first experience using macOS, as a long time Windows user. The first few months on macOS was a totally frustrating and negative experience for me - "What the ...? why does the ENTER key not open files or folders? Why is it going to 'rename' mode? Why doesn't double-click…

The micro-interactions and hotkeys in GIMP are just so poor though. For example, basic stuff like zoom in and zoom out are bound differently to literally any other app on any platform . This catches me out every single time I try to use it, and I'll never learn the GIMP way. Spoiler for anyone unfamiliar: it's not Ctrl+/Ctrl-.

Tried it, apparently ctrl is not needed. I usually use ctrl-scroll so hadn’t noticed. Maybe we can get them added.

Re: Photo GIMP – A Patch for GIMP 3 for Photoshop Users

#220

Post by jrm4 »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #218
jrm4 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, me too. And also, no one would USE IT. That's my point. It really is that simple. I'm not primarily talking about "being offended." Jokes are fine in some contexts. I'm saying that if you want people to take your software seriously, it needs a serious name. And that the GIMP people very very stupidly missed a huge opportunity by not doing that.

But I’ve been using gimp productively for almost thirty years, late 90s on SGI. At no point was the name a factor. Can’t force them to change it either. And in the dictionary I found at least one quite positive definition. Sometimes word have conflicting meanings and we deal with that successfully every day.

At no point was the name a factor FOR YOU.

Your individual anecdote isn't data.

Post reply on HN