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

GIMP development - What’s the point?

mail.gnome.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 149 posts

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#61

Post by vidarh »

imaginenore wrote: post #36

After all these years GIMP still sucks. They waste time on developing features of low importance, while critical ones are still not solved. Prime case: opening RAW files. The current suggested workflow is to use a 3rd party plugin UFRaw. Would you like to see the process of installing it on Windows? http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/Install.html (Ctlr+F for "MS-Windows for geeks") And then I see arrogant posts like that,…

What is critical to you is not to me, and vice versa. E.g. I have never in my life needed to work with RAW files. I have also never in my life needed to manipulate graphics on Windows.

I understand that is frustrating, but this is one of the challenges of open source - the contributors can make choices without caring about attracting customers.

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#62

Post by nadezhda18 »

I am surprised nobody talked about Text tool and action recording.

I also use Photoshop CS2 (which Abobe started giving away about 3-4 years ago), and oh boy is its Text tool much more advanced. CS2 was released in 2005 and the latest version of Gimp (2.8.10) still cannot compare :( From my point of view, working with text is a pain in Gimp :(

Also, action recording - I think it is a highly valuable feature for anyone who processes at least 1 photo a week. It seems now so inefficient to repeat the same 4-5 steps again and again and again.

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#63

Post by WhitneyLand »

nnq wrote: post #56
WhitneyLand wrote: post #42

Sorry to say I don't think GIMP is the best example of a great FLOSS project. Many other projects are very competitive (or better) than commercial options but GIMP is not even close. They just released support for 16bit/32bit/c color last year which is needed for so many scenarios. The unified transform tool mentioned as a highlight is really a pretty simple thing to code. They are 5-10 years behind what you get in P…

> There are many examples of complex professional systems that prove a decent UX is still possible ...and Adobe PS is not one of them! People tolerate its UX/I because the functionality is unequaled and, after you commit to visual and muscle-memory all the shortcuts and locations of commands and options, you can be extremely productive despite the UX/I. Also, people coming from the "physical arts" category are kind o…

Totally agree PS has its own UX issues. My personal favorite: different key combinations for the first time you undo and the second time you undo.

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#65

Post by tomtomtom777 »

pmoriarty wrote: post #58

People whining about GIMP not being as good as PS don't appreciate what life was like on Linux before GIMP existed, or how primitive GIMP was when it first came out. GIMP has advanced leaps and bound over what it once was. I remember for ages PS fans were complaining about how GIMP had a multiple window layout, and how unnecessarily complex that was, and they wanted a single window layout. So the volunteers who work…

For professional use, how does modern GIMP compare to modern PS?

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#66

Post by notalaser »

pmoriarty wrote: post #58

People whining about GIMP not being as good as PS don't appreciate what life was like on Linux before GIMP existed, or how primitive GIMP was when it first came out. GIMP has advanced leaps and bound over what it once was. I remember for ages PS fans were complaining about how GIMP had a multiple window layout, and how unnecessarily complex that was, and they wanted a single window layout. So the volunteers who work…

> I remember for ages PS fans were complaining about how GIMP had a multiple window layout, and how unnecessarily complex that was, and they wanted a single window layout. So the volunteers who work on GIMP eventually came out with a single window layout.

Ironically enough, Photoshop itself used to have a multiple-window layout, in its Unix versions: http://i.imgur.com/Lzlbyp9.jpg .

(That's an IRIX system, see author's explanation at https://www.reddit.com/r/unixporn/comments/5377kv/4dwm_sgi_i... )

I wouldn't be surprised if that were where Gimp got its inspiration from.

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#67

Post by pmoriarty »

nnq wrote: post #56
WhitneyLand wrote: post #42

Sorry to say I don't think GIMP is the best example of a great FLOSS project. Many other projects are very competitive (or better) than commercial options but GIMP is not even close. They just released support for 16bit/32bit/c color last year which is needed for so many scenarios. The unified transform tool mentioned as a highlight is really a pretty simple thing to code. They are 5-10 years behind what you get in P…

> There are many examples of complex professional systems that prove a decent UX is still possible ...and Adobe PS is not one of them! People tolerate its UX/I because the functionality is unequaled and, after you commit to visual and muscle-memory all the shortcuts and locations of commands and options, you can be extremely productive despite the UX/I. Also, people coming from the "physical arts" category are kind o…

"people coming from the "physical arts" category are kind of used to horrible UX/I... I mean, the "UX/I" of a paint brush is pure horror story"

How would you improve on the UI of a physical paint brush?

Re: GIMP development - What’s the point?

#68

Post by executesorder66 »

imaginenore wrote: post #36

After all these years GIMP still sucks. They waste time on developing features of low importance, while critical ones are still not solved. Prime case: opening RAW files. The current suggested workflow is to use a 3rd party plugin UFRaw. Would you like to see the process of installing it on Windows? http://ufraw.sourceforge.net/Install.html (Ctlr+F for "MS-Windows for geeks") And then I see arrogant posts like that,…

> GIMP will become popular when GIMP developers start thinking about the modern photographer's workflow.

GIMP is for image editing. Not for photography.

Use darktable if you want a FOSS application for a photography workflow. (it can open RAW files)

Similarly Krita is for creating digital art. It's main goal is not to be an image editor.

Post reply on HN