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

GIMP receives a $100K donation

gimp.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 318 posts

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#221

Post by boudin »

tokyodude wrote: post #202
boudin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's more a question of wording rather than an issue. In gimps export is for formats with which you lose information (your layers for example), save is for formats allowing you to re-open you file as you let it and continue working on it

Not, it's not. It's a question of getting work done vs fighting your tools. As someone that edits PNGs and JPGs often with Photoshop I double click the file in the Finder (mac) or Windows Explorer (win) and suddenly I'm editing the PNG or JPG. I make some edits, if I add layers or features that can't be saved back to those formats I flatten the editing (Cmd-Shift-E, of course also on menus in 2 places). I then just p…

It is, it's a design choice. You can do exactly the same with gimp. You can even do non destructive saves using the classic save shortcut and export it using the export shortcut (which must be cmd+e on mac i guess) when you want without messing with your current work. I personally find this more convenient than having to do a first non destructive save, save as a destructive format and reopen the first save again if you want to continue working, but it's a bit different than other tools yes

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#222

Post by purerandomness »

gnulinux wrote: post #174
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still should be an option under save-as. I can do this with paint.net. I do this all the time with Corel Painter. Any work in progress gets saved in a way that opens with the layers (corel's format). When I'm done, I can simply collapse the layers and save in a number of formats. No big deal. I understand that some formats simply don't allow the layers. That shouldn't be an issue, though. All it takes is a popup t…

> It still should be an option under save-as. Why? I don't understand this. You're not "saving" what you see on the monitor by storing the information to a .png file; the moment you "save" you'll lose some information decided by an algorithm you do not understand, so it really is not "saving" anything, it's "exporting" what you see on the monitor to a different format. When you actually click the "save" button in gim…

Your definition of "save" is not the common, user-centric one.

As a user, I think about "saving" as a process to persist my work. If there might be technical fine-grained issues, show me a warning sign in the save dialog, but don't come up with a process that "makes me think".

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#223

Post by zmix »

ptero wrote: post #105

This is great, I hope Gimp puts it to good use. I would love for Gimp to focus more on artistic uses instead of only on software types (which is probably a vain hope). We would greatly benefit from a good artistic/photo image editing tool that does not belong to the Adobe's subscription license racket. Unfortunately, Gimp is not nearly in the same class as Photoshop, so most artists grumble about Adobe but still pay…

> [...] I hope Gimp puts it to good use.

From the announcment:

> [...] and will use the money to do much overdue hardware

> upgrade for the core team members and organize the next

> hackfest to bring the team together, as well as sponsor the

> next instance of Libre Graphics Meeting.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#224

Post by lucb1e »

jasonjayr wrote: post #185
lucb1e wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've used GIMP for years but I have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps it's not the #1 priority because you're one of a small percentage of people who need it? While I'm not someone who needs image editing professionally or who makes amazing things with it, I did take my time to learn GIMP properly for my use-cases, and the things I find lacking do not include "non-destructive adjustment layers".

It's one of those features that once you notice in Photoshop, you lament the lack in GIMP. The gist of it is that all your filters, color corrections are just additional layers, w/o manipulating the image in the layer under them. It lets you very quickly toggle between different settings, revise settings, and even very easily only filter parts of an image. (ie, you can have a unfiltered layer above a stack of filters…

How is this different from duplicating the layer (Ctrl+Shift+D for quick usage) and then applying the filter? It's two more manual steps (one hotkey to duplicate, and another action later to delete the old layer) but it doesn't sound like something currently impossible in GIMP.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#225

Post by RussianCow »

geoah wrote: post #218
RussianCow wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people really expect to be paid market rate for open source work?

Why not?

Because I would expect that you generally sacrifice part of your salary for the ability to work on free and open source software full-time, much like you would generally take a pay cut working at a non-profit.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#226

Post by daeken »

RussianCow wrote: post #216
dboreham wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're about an order of magnitude off.

Do people really expect to be paid market rate for open source work?

If I'm doing something for free, I don't mind doing it for free (obviously). If I'm doing something for money, I want to be paid my going rate; otherwise, either find someone else or sell me on just volunteering. I'd never charge $20/hr for software stuff -- it's basically $0/hr (which is most of my time, by choice) or market rate. It's actually the market rate billing that free me up to volunteer with open source projects in the first place.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#227

Post by joshumax »

curuinor wrote: post #164
ISL wrote: post #162

If everyone complaining about GIMP in this thread (and most clearly spend a lot of time using it, myself included) donated $20 or an hour of their time to GIMP, that'd be another $2k or ~100+ hours of time donated (as of this moment) to help make it better. I have to run to work, so I just donated $20. https://www.gimp.org/donating/

$20/hr for knows-wtf-they're-doing programmer time?

I make about $20 USD an hour doing low-level work writing performant C and x86 assembly at my current job.

Granted, it's not my only source of income, but what is the average pay/hour for most devs?

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#228

Post by dotancohen »

MrEfficiency wrote: post #118
mikebelanger wrote: post #66

My hope: whichever direction Gimp development goes, they should try doing something similar to Blender - where they bring a bunch of developers and artists into a space. While they're in that space (for a limited amount of time) work on some big project involving Gimp. Develop Gimp to suite that project's needs.

Can we streamline the controls? Thats what GIMP needs. After 9 years of using GIMP I switched to photoshop because I was doing many photos and couldnt hand the inconsistency of what each button does.

If you'll provide more detail as to which inconsistencies you've found, I'll take the time to test and write up an actionable bug report.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#229

Post by DoreenMichele »

daeken wrote: post #226
RussianCow wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people really expect to be paid market rate for open source work?

If I'm doing something for free, I don't mind doing it for free (obviously). If I'm doing something for money, I want to be paid my going rate; otherwise, either find someone else or sell me on just volunteering. I'd never charge $20/hr for software stuff -- it's basically $0/hr (which is most of my time, by choice) or market rate. It's actually the market rate billing that free me up to volunteer with open source pr…

Studies back you up and suggest "Pay enough or not at all." Paying below market rate tends to just piss people off and make them feel insulted and undervalued.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#230

Post by Reedx »

gempir wrote: post #52
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #41

"only" $100K - aren't we living in a world now where companies started in a garage make that amount of money ten times a second? I haven't heard anything from e.g. Google or Facebook's open source funding endeavours. IMO every successful company should do their part and set aside a sizeable percentage of their revenue to paying and supporting open source projects and developers. It's wrong that e.g. the developer of…

Well in the end the world is not a fair place. Linux Torvalds isn't exactly loaded either, although he isn't poor. But In the end people are gonna abuse your products to make as much money as possible and there is no guarantee, you will ever see a penny of it if you sell it as Free Software.

I always think of Linus in these cases too.

Supposedly he's worth $150m, but even if that's accurate it would still mean he's only captured a very small % of the value he created.

Post reply on HN