61–70 of 220 posts
GIMP is the only program that I miss when switched from linux to mac. And GIMP 2.2 was just a perfect for my needs back then
Earlier quoted context omitted.
c) There's a sane, standard way of doing things that everybody is familiar with, but you do decide to actively go against it for decades because you like doing things your way, and if anyone has anything to say about it they're "free to fork" and you "don't owe anyone anything", but despite that, everyone should use your thing because it's free and you're the good guy, and otherwise they're supporting the empire of e…
This is a lot of very confident assertions. > you do decide to actively go against it for decades because you like doing things your way Perhaps there's a good reason why a developer or a group of developers decide to do things a certain way. > This is why Krita is sweeping the floor with gimp Aside from the fact that these programs are intended for pretty different things, the impression I have is that GIMP has a mu…
Krita is so much more accessible than GIMP. Only Gimp devs would love Gimps interface. Just the existence of Gimp seems like so much effort flushed down the toilet because of someone's bad, bad taste and incredibly poor user interface design
GIMP gets the work done. I've never had an issue I couldn't address with its tools, but it's clear the UI was crafted by coders. I'm glad for this approach.
Is it? Why? Looking at the screenshot on this, it just seems like a few items were moved around a bit, presumably because that's where Photoshop has them.
GIMP gets the work done. I've never had an issue I couldn't address with its tools, but it's clear the UI was crafted by coders. I'm glad for this approach.
1. GIMP needs a total UX overhaul 2. GIMP needs RAW support, precision support, and a better data backbone 3. GIMP needs a rename. It's both a sex kink term [1] (not to yuck anyone's yums) and a slur term for disabled people [2] 4. Gen AI will probably disrupt all of this anyway. [1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00I8S3ZHQ [2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gimp
2. GIMP isn't a raw editor, use darktable or rawtherapee
3. Poor naming decisions do not warrant a change this late, people know GIMP
4. Keep dreaming
It reminds of my first experience using macOS, as a long time Windows user. The first few months on macOS was a totally frustrating and negative experience for me - "What the ...? why does the ENTER key not open files or folders? Why is it going to 'rename' mode? Why doesn't double-clicking the title bar on a window maximise the window? Why are some windows maximised and others take their own custom width? Why is the Maximise button making apps full screen!?" - and so on.
The point is that I had become so familiar with the Windows UI, that every other OS UI suddenly seemed alien - "This is not how a UI should work on an OS". (This was also the reason that I hated Ubuntu's DE, as it tried to imitate the macOS UI I was then unfamiliar with). Familiarity means when you face a new UI, you have to spend effort to re-learn your way of thinking around a UI, which can be a frustrating experience (especially as you grow older). That effort / stress also unconsciously creates a negative impression in your mind about the UI. Both Apple and Microsoft know this and that is why they deliberately make their UI distinct and different from each other - whether it is Windows vs macOS or Windows Phone vs ios. Recently someone (a non-geek) asked me if they should buy a Macbook as they had an iPhone too. As they were a Windows user, I warned them that the macOS UI would be frustrating and to try macOS before committing to it. They did, and ultimately decided against it and chose to stick to Windows (buying a Surface Tablet).
As a former graphic designer, and an experienced Photoshop user, I only considered GIMP as a replacement when Adobe decided to make it a subscription. And just as with Windows to macOS, re-learning to use the GIMP UI was a frustrating experience because I was always thinking of "this is how it is done in Photoshop". Once you let go of that "familiarity", and are willing to actually test if the "GIMP way" is maybe better, it becomes a less frustrating experience. (All that said, while I have got used to using the GIMP tools the GIMP way, the overall GIMP layout does have a cluttered feeling and I do recommend installing Photo GIMP - it won't really make GIMP a Photoshop clone, but it will make it more "familiar" and thus easier to "re-learn" how to use it).
I really hate [edit: the necessity for something like] this. I deeply disagree that Photoshop has better UI than GIMP, it's just that GIMP is no professional's daily driver, you were paid to learn Photoshop; and whenever you learned any technique, you learned it in Photoshop. Clinging to Photoshop UI (which is completely arbitrary and bizarre) just supports Photoshop - you're taking a vacation instead of making a mov…
I am glad someone is putting in this effort. Many years ago, there was another project called GIMPshop to make GIMP's interface more accessible to Photoshop users. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMPshop They taught Photoshop at school, so I found it easier to use GIMPshop than regular GIMP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I completely agree. Every few years I give GIMP a shot, and every time I give up because it's completely inscrutable. Adobe is evil, and Pixelmator lacks features, but at least you can figure out how to use them in short order.
Check out Krita, it's a much easier lift for someone used to photoshop ime. At least, if you're doing digital art. Not as full featured for editing of photo's.