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

261–270 of 318 posts

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#261

Post by ghostly_s »

BeetleB wrote: post #238
ghostly_s wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Darktable is not even in the same category as Lightroom. I spent months trying to figure out how to make it work for me before realizing it has zero library management functionality, which the devs seem to have missed is Lightroom's main value proposition. It is purely a non-destructive editor, and if you look up discussions on this topic on the mail lists you'll see WONTFIX responses in the vein of "just use your fi…

>I spent months trying to figure out how to make it work for me before realizing it has zero library management functionality It would help if you specify what you mean by library management. What it doesn't do, and is very clear, is handle things like renaming files. You are expected to have copied the files over to your hard drive and organized them into folders (in any way that you like). Beyond that, it serves li…

> You import a folder, and it becomes a collection.

Right. And then as I'm working on a project, and decide that collection needs to be two sub-collections, these three shots should actually be in this other project, these two shots maybe should be part of both this project and that project, these three portraits might fit the mood of that collection I'started putting together a few months ago... what do I do then? I'm fine with having to pick a folder to store my files in, that's a simple data storage problem. Library management is about semantic data, and in case you haven't noticed every file browser is absolutely garbage at that. Tags, especially the tiny little PITA tag browser box that was so clearly an afterthought in darktable, are an inadequate solution.

(I spent months trying to figure out what I was missing because I heard darktable repeatedly pitched as an equivalent to Lightroom, such as in the comment I replied to here, so I figured an answer to these fundamental workflows needs must be hidden in there somewhere and I was just committing the cardinal sin of Not Reading The Docs. When I finally did pore through the docs and find nothing more than tagging is when I jumped on the mail lists and discovered the devs are actually not interested in building an Lightroom equivalent.)

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#262

Post by themodelplumber »

prokoudine wrote: post #259
themodelplumber wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Of course it would be Boudewijn Rempt)--much respect to you and thank you for your question. > gimp developers work on gimp because they like gimp I'd say: GIMP has always been good enough for GIMP developers as its own world to explore--what is it, what can we make it become for the sake of GIMP. I remember the good old days (frankly I'm not sure if this still happens) when a mailing list suggestion like "look, Pho…

> The latter type of focus, the internal focus, asks "what do _we_ want to do, what interests _us_ as a team, what's next for _us_" and I believe that's always been a feature of GIMP's existence Right now, the focus is on completing the GTK+3 port for v3.0 and making room in API for upcoming serious changes in v3.2 such as non-destructive editing. Sounds good enough? :)

I'm feeling quite spoiled here--updates coming straight to the rabble from the source. :-) And when I'm still catching up with new features from last year! Now this non-destructive editing thing, can it also cure someone who rasterizes all of his text layers without making backups? ;-) (Really it does sound awesome)

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#263

Post by gurkendoktor »

RussianCow wrote: post #225
geoah wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't know why you're being downvoted. I'm a contractor and my hourly rate absolutely depends on how good I feel about a project. Working on (useful) open source is a plus. I wouldn't go down to $20 though.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#264

Post by dirkgently »

lucb1e wrote: post #224
jasonjayr wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Simple answer is that those bitching about lack of features want GIMP to provide exact same features as Photoshop with exact same workflow.

I wonder if these same people also bitch about learning new languages or frameworks when technology moves on.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#265

Post by gurkendoktor »

jancsika wrote: post #130
dahart wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I don’t get why it’s this hard for open source projects to realize that I don’t know, but I’ll throw out my theory. Note I’m very much a fan of open source even though this might sound negative. I would also love to see GIMPs UI get an overhaul. In short, I think it’s harder to prioritize open source features for multiple reasons. When you don’t have paying customers, it’s very hard to prioritize the feedback y…

I'm sure there are people who are UI experts who would be willing to improve FLOSS UIs in their spare time. The problem is that the current developer base of many FLOSS project don't understand that a) decent UI requires an expertise and b) knowing how their poor UIs are implemented doesn't count as expertise in UI development. For example-- if I write to a FLOSS mailing list that the way they are using realloc leave…

> the current developer base of many FLOSS project don't understand that a) decent UI requires an expertise

One additional problem is that it's hard to know who to listen to. Someone who seems like a confident UI expert might as well be a misguided visionary who will turn GIMP into the next Windows 8. Randomly trusting a designer is probably just as dangerous as randomly trusting a software developer.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#266

Post by RussianCow »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #229
daeken wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's interesting. Do you happen to have a link to an article or study about this so that I can learn more?

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#267

Post by oedmarap »

ghostly_s wrote: post #122
PascLeRasc wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Krita's pretty good for an digital-pencil-based art tool and Darktable is a nice Lightroom replacement, both just need a bit of UI tuning.

Darktable is not even in the same category as Lightroom. I spent months trying to figure out how to make it work for me before realizing it has zero library management functionality, which the devs seem to have missed is Lightroom's main value proposition. It is purely a non-destructive editor, and if you look up discussions on this topic on the mail lists you'll see WONTFIX responses in the vein of "just use your fi…

That's quite odd. I've noticed that every other photographer I know dislikes Lightroom for the very fact that it uses libraries -- ending up being way too bulky and a resource hog when scaling across cameras, editing machines, studio locations, and storage drives.

Phase One's Capture One solves this by using "sessions" instead, which lets you keep any sort of workspace as a loose individual folder; with preset subfolders for raw files, output, trash, previews, etc. You still get the benefits of tagging and other bells and whistles of searchable libraries but with much easier grouping and portability.

While this really doesn't apply to casual editing, I think the performance benefits and flexibility of the session approach over LR's insistence on libraries cannot be overstated if your RAW files start to number in the thousands after a few months (event/wedding photographers, etc.).

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#268

Post by RussianCow »

komali2 wrote: post #260
RussianCow wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being able to organize thousands of photos dynamically by tags, date, etc, is enormously productive, as opposed to only having a single, static hierarchy through which to find photos. For instance, I could quickly retrieve all scenic photos across our entire collection.

Did not even realize tagging existed... but does that mean all photos must be in the same library? For example my workflow is usually Pull pictures off camera manually into a date-named folder Open lightroom, click "new catalog" Put catalog into named date folder Import those photos (import without move option) Work on those photos, use the slider catalog thing at the bottom to filter by flagged (the ones I edited an…

It's been several years since I've used it, so I could be completely wrong, but yes, I believe that kind of filtering only works at the catalog level, so all of your photos would have to be in the same catalog to gain that benefit. When I used it, I only had one catalog that encompassed my entire photo library.

My impression is that Lightroom is really designed for you to go "all in" and let it organize everything.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#269

Post by DoreenMichele »

RussianCow wrote: post #266
DoreenMichele wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's interesting. Do you happen to have a link to an article or study about this so that I can learn more?

If you search for "pay enough or don't pay at all" you should have no problem finding sources.

I'm not going to link to anything here because that implies vetting and I'm not going to vet anything. This isn't at all hard to find.

Re: GIMP receives a $100K donation

#270

Post by RussianCow »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #269
RussianCow wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's interesting. Do you happen to have a link to an article or study about this so that I can learn more?

If you search for "pay enough or don't pay at all" you should have no problem finding sources. I'm not going to link to anything here because that implies vetting and I'm not going to vet anything. This isn't at all hard to find.

Thanks, I couldn't get my search query just right. No need to be snarky, though.
Post reply on HN