271–280 of 318 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Please give us non-destructive adjustment layers! Please! Been waiting for this for years. On every new Gimp release I look through the new features and ... no. No adjustment layers. I'm confused how this is not the #1 priority. It has been what I am missing for years and years. And every time I talk to someone about Gimp vs Photoshop, they ask me 'Do you still have to cope with destructive adjustment curves and filt…
The problem is also that there are new applications that started they development later than GIMP and shipped with Adjustment Layers and colorspace support in their first or second revisions. As far as I understand the core needs to be completely updated to GEGL for this to work. Let's hope this money will help them get to the goal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They really should not do that. Saving implies that you can save the entire state of the image in a file, including layers, etc. Exporting implies saving a file as a different format that may not be 100% faithful to what you see in the app. Disallowing saving follows the principle of least surprise, because when an application reports a successful save, users would expect the application state they see to actually be…
That's really only true if your mental model is saving the state of the project or program. Most people want to save the state of the image, and exporting layer, guide, and other data is secondary to that. To put it another way, all the data you want "Save" to save isn't actually important to most people who want to use the "Save" button, and if it is they're most certainly aware of which image formats preserve that…
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/
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/
Anyone know which of the donation options respects privacy, and isn't paypal? Haha.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What is exactly the problem with gimp's UI? Where do I start? - sometimes when I start it it doesn't display toolbox - when I open the toolbox it is (sometimes) a vertical line of buttons (single column) instead of 5 columns that I begged it countless times to be - setting the size of pencil is completely unintuitive - I usually click in what appears to be input field, only to discover it is not (but instead some m…
> setting the size of pencil is completely unintuitive - I usually click in what appears to be input field, only to discover it is not (but instead some meter that sets size to some huge number) It actually is an input field, but it can be interacted with in 3 ways. Clicking on the value focuses it, and allows editing by keyboard. Clicking and dragging in the bottom half of the block allows you to increase or decreas…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GIMP's IWarp workflow is horrendous. And this is saying something - photoshop's liquify could be much better too.
> GIMP's IWarp workflow is horrendous. Welcome to 2018 where GIMP 2.10 is available and features the Warp Transform tool that does the same (actually, more) and works directly on the canvas.
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.
Mind you, I haven't used Photoshop in years and GIMP (or Krita) has proven well enough for the image work I need to do. This is just one thing that stuck with me from 15 years ago!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Someone as pragmatic as him, still working and taking/giving abuse at that "milemarker" of wealth? Huh.