291–300 of 318 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, I couldn't get my search query just right. No need to be snarky, though.
I wasn't being snarky.
(I don't necessarily object to snarkiness. And obviously, tone can be hard to judge in plain text.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wasn't being snarky.
Eh, this line came across as pretty snarky: "This isn't at all hard to find." (I don't necessarily object to snarkiness. And obviously, tone can be hard to judge in plain text.)
I did the search, found lots of stuff readily available, shared my exact search phrase so it could be replicated and explained my reasoning for sharing the search phrase instead of a link. And now two people are busting my chops for actually being helpful.
I bet no one would have said a damn thing had I simply not bothered to reply and, in this case, not bothering to reply would have been the jerk thing to do because it would have been unhelpful to someone actually sincerely needing help and it would have been done on a bad faith assumption.
Geez.
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?
If you ask people to give $50, fewer people will than if you ask them $20 so overall they will get more money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the features you want are in a niche very far from general-purpose photo-editing. Moving GIMP in that direction would be the kind of mission-diluting step that can kill a project. What you're looking for a tool specialized for scientific use -- maybe try ImageJ?
My point exactly! GIMP is GNU's image manipulation program, not photo manipulation program. Most images are not photos.
Just use ImageJ!
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…
Actually, in Gimp 2.10.4 it now for me even changes the shape of the cursor: lower half: ↔ (left-right arrows) upper half: ↑ (up-arrow) so it seems they fixed the discoverability :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
GEGL was mostly done in 2.10.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$20/hr for doesn't-know-GIMP's-architecture-but-submits-a-possibly-useful-patch-anyway time. If $20 sounds too low, feel free to pitch in more. I'm a physics postdoc, not a software dev.
You're about an order of magnitude off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those skills as a mid-tier seniority developer, not in Silicon Valley in the land of make-believe? Probably like $85k-110k. If you live in SV it might be like $210k or something absurd.
210k is what you’d get as a junior though
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…
Huh? Gimp has had 16-bit and 32-bit color depth per channel since 2.10 was released back in April.
I understand that open source means you can do whatever you want yourself, but both conversations started when they heard I got photoshop and said "no no no, do not waste your money, let us show you how gimp is the better tool".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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)
A naive implementation might just have two buffers and a list of pixel changesets and no knowledge of how the changes were made. A more advanced implementation could track more information, work on a per layer basis, and support the recovery of vector text layers from rastered ones.
So I guess the answer is not by default, but it opens the door for it to be a thing.