Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
A first look at the new GIMP 2.0
By Brice Burgess
on
February 25, 2004 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
The GNU Image Manipulation Program, a.k.a. the GIMP, is a freely available and versatile graphic editor comparable to Adobe Photoshop and Jasc Paintshop Pro. This powerful program can refine photographs, generate animated images, and create graphics suitable for the Web and print. The highly anticipated version 2.0 of the GIMP, due out next month, will run under Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux, and preview versions are now available for all three platforms. In this article we'll examine some of the key differences between the stable GIMP 1.2 and the upcoming version 2.0 of the software.
I have been using the GIMP on and off since 1997 to create graphics for the Web sites I work on, touch up Christmas cards for the family, and superimpose friends' images in inadvisable proximity to grizzly bears.
I am not a professional graphic artist, and neither, probably, are you, but with the GIMP, you don't have to be to make good use of the program.
New look
When you launch version 2.0 you'll see a new look that's a huge improvement over the previous version's mundane and purely functional interface. The new design not only provides a polished and comfortable feel, it is also far more intuitive and friendly than its predecessor. The colorful icons and superior aesthetics of GTK2 (GIMP Toolkit) is the first difference you notice. The professionalism they convey is invaluable to the user's experience.
The second thing you notice about the new version is the GIMP's "dockability." All dialogs (Brushes, Layers, Tool Options, etc.) can now be detached from the main window and shown in a separate window, added to an existing dialog window, or hidden from view. The software saves all changes you make to your view preferences, so that when you next go to work, your tools remain laid out as they were during your last session. This not only allows you to create a custom environment that suits your needs, but also helps reduce screen clutter.
Improved text tool and CMYK color
A monumental change in GIMP 2.0 is a much-improved text tool. The new tool boasts enhanced font selection and allows for multi-line entries. All changes are immediately reflected on the canvas, making it much easier for designers to preview their text within the image context. Further, you can export text as a path in order to tweak its shape, fill style, or scale.
Overall I liked the new features, but I uncovered some quirks and was left wanting more. For starters the right->left, left->right function didn't appear to work. I was only allowed left->right orientation. And if right->left is allowed, why not top->bottom and vice versa? Secondly, the text sometimes disappeared from the canvas and would only re-appear if I made a change in the text editor. Among the features I still wish for is the ability to change specific attributes within the editor; for example, to have the first letter of a word be bold, red, and 18 pixels, and all others be crimson and 16 pixels. You can do this by using two different text areas, but that can be incredibly tedious. Also, it would be nice to have a simple means of transforming the text via included templates -- that is, "round" text to fit an ellipse, make a 3D outline of text using a drop shadow, slant text, or "mirror" text by inverting it. Lastly, an auto-kerning feature similar to the one in Macromedia Fireworks would be nice to have.
Another important addition to version 2.0 is the ability to pick a color based on its CMYK (a color model used by printers) value via the colors dialog. Having once run 200 off-colored business cards, I know firsthand the value of CMYK use. Admittedly, the current rendition of CMYK in the GIMP is far behind that of commercial offerings, but the mere existence of CMYK in the latest version means we can look forward to improved profile selection in future versions.
I ran across several pleasant surprises while previewing the software. The rewritten path tool is more intuitive and functional than before. You can export paths to scalable vector graphic (SVG) format, allowing you to import them into vector-based programs such as Adobe Illustrator. The Undo tool has become a favorite of mine. With it, you're now given an overview of the steps (such as selections, fills, and moves) that make up the image, along with the state and a preview of the image as a consequence of a particular step. You can navigate the steps forward and backward in order to return to any point in the editing process. This is an absolute essential for a positive imaging session. Additionally, the "Fill with FG/BG color" choice in the edit menu has a preview of the currently loaded foreground and background colors, so you don't have to look to remember what colors you're working with. Surprisingly, this helpful function is missing from the New Image dialog.
Room for improvement
Of course there is always room for improvement. I'd like to see a built-in "save for Web" function with which you can preview an image next to the original under different GIF, PNG, and JPEG settings. Such a feature makes it easier to determine the best trade-off between visible quality and file size, especially under two-up and four-up layouts. Since the GIMP is an essential tool for Web developers, this feature would be well-received. I also noticed that if you have an active selection, you cannot start a selection tool from within the selection. Being able to do so would be useful when, for example, you want to "subtract" a small circle from within a larger one to form a donut-shaped selection.
The 2.0 release will not be based on the Generic Graphic Library (GEGL) as was originally intended by those who attended the 2000 GIMP Developers Conference. While end users would probably never notice this change, GEGL's introduction would aid developers by providing a simple, powerful way to add features. The idea has not been abandoned; we can look forward to future versions of the GIMP being based on GEGL and loaded with even more goodies.
Final remarks
Overall I was very impressed with the new GIMP. Because I am a fan of free software, I prefer the use of the GIMP over commercially available alternatives. The current onslaught of enhancements makes it much easier to adopt the GIMP as my default image editor and do away with the others.
The new GIMP will more than satisfy the needs of most graphic artists. Even if you gave up on earlier versions, you won't be disappointed with 2.0. And if you've never used the software before, you'll be impressed!
Further Resources
New look
| |
| Interfaces: 2.0 vs. 1.2 -- click to enlarge |
The second thing you notice about the new version is the GIMP's "dockability." All dialogs (Brushes, Layers, Tool Options, etc.) can now be detached from the main window and shown in a separate window, added to an existing dialog window, or hidden from view. The software saves all changes you make to your view preferences, so that when you next go to work, your tools remain laid out as they were during your last session. This not only allows you to create a custom environment that suits your needs, but also helps reduce screen clutter.
Improved text tool and CMYK color
|
| |
| Multiple dialogs grouped together -- click to enlarge |
Overall I liked the new features, but I uncovered some quirks and was left wanting more. For starters the right->left, left->right function didn't appear to work. I was only allowed left->right orientation. And if right->left is allowed, why not top->bottom and vice versa? Secondly, the text sometimes disappeared from the canvas and would only re-appear if I made a change in the text editor. Among the features I still wish for is the ability to change specific attributes within the editor; for example, to have the first letter of a word be bold, red, and 18 pixels, and all others be crimson and 16 pixels. You can do this by using two different text areas, but that can be incredibly tedious. Also, it would be nice to have a simple means of transforming the text via included templates -- that is, "round" text to fit an ellipse, make a 3D outline of text using a drop shadow, slant text, or "mirror" text by inverting it. Lastly, an auto-kerning feature similar to the one in Macromedia Fireworks would be nice to have.
Another important addition to version 2.0 is the ability to pick a color based on its CMYK (a color model used by printers) value via the colors dialog. Having once run 200 off-colored business cards, I know firsthand the value of CMYK use. Admittedly, the current rendition of CMYK in the GIMP is far behind that of commercial offerings, but the mere existence of CMYK in the latest version means we can look forward to improved profile selection in future versions.
I ran across several pleasant surprises while previewing the software. The rewritten path tool is more intuitive and functional than before. You can export paths to scalable vector graphic (SVG) format, allowing you to import them into vector-based programs such as Adobe Illustrator. The Undo tool has become a favorite of mine. With it, you're now given an overview of the steps (such as selections, fills, and moves) that make up the image, along with the state and a preview of the image as a consequence of a particular step. You can navigate the steps forward and backward in order to return to any point in the editing process. This is an absolute essential for a positive imaging session. Additionally, the "Fill with FG/BG color" choice in the edit menu has a preview of the currently loaded foreground and background colors, so you don't have to look to remember what colors you're working with. Surprisingly, this helpful function is missing from the New Image dialog.
Room for improvement
Of course there is always room for improvement. I'd like to see a built-in "save for Web" function with which you can preview an image next to the original under different GIF, PNG, and JPEG settings. Such a feature makes it easier to determine the best trade-off between visible quality and file size, especially under two-up and four-up layouts. Since the GIMP is an essential tool for Web developers, this feature would be well-received. I also noticed that if you have an active selection, you cannot start a selection tool from within the selection. Being able to do so would be useful when, for example, you want to "subtract" a small circle from within a larger one to form a donut-shaped selection.
The 2.0 release will not be based on the Generic Graphic Library (GEGL) as was originally intended by those who attended the 2000 GIMP Developers Conference. While end users would probably never notice this change, GEGL's introduction would aid developers by providing a simple, powerful way to add features. The idea has not been abandoned; we can look forward to future versions of the GIMP being based on GEGL and loaded with even more goodies.
Final remarks
Overall I was very impressed with the new GIMP. Because I am a fan of free software, I prefer the use of the GIMP over commercially available alternatives. The current onslaught of enhancements makes it much easier to adopt the GIMP as my default image editor and do away with the others.
The new GIMP will more than satisfy the needs of most graphic artists. Even if you gave up on earlier versions, you won't be disappointed with 2.0. And if you've never used the software before, you'll be impressed!
Further Resources
- IRC -- #gimp on irc.gimp.org
- Usenet -- comp.graphics.apps.gimp
- Gimp User Group -- gug.sunsite.dk
- Developer site -- developer.gimp.org
- More GIMP Screenshots -- here
- Grokking the GIMP (Excellent Tutorial) - here
Comments
on A first look at the new GIMP 2.0Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
I have been corrected on the "Note". Apparently, you only need to be holding the modifier at the time of the click, you may release after clicking and the constraints go away.
Gimp 1.2 did this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:^)
Which isn't just a "professional" issue, since a lot of "pro-sumer" cameras will export 16 bit raw files. I'm incredibly disappointed with the GIMP team's cavalier attitude towards 16 bit support.
Or at least 12. I'd like to see on-screen dithering when using 8 and 16 bit modes since there is serious color-banding otherwise and it's impossible to tell if it's in the original or just because of truncation for display on the screen.
16 bit is coming with GEGL, although who knows when that will be. I don't think they are being cavalier, it's just that it's a big under-the-hood change to do it right.
Without proper 16bit support, the Gimp is a toy (in terms of professional use).
Yes, yes, we have heard that TheGimp project awaits that other library project Gimp uses to add 16bit support and then Gimp will get support for it (in Gimp 3.0, in years from now), but this is completely beside the point. The point is that TheGimp SHOULD have had 16bit per channel support on 2.0 already. We are not in 1995 anymore.
As a home app to do a few web graphics or some home image manipulation, the Gimp is ok. But as a pro or pro-sumer digital photographer, Gimp is a *no go*.
Yes, yes, we have heard that TheGimp project awaits that other library project Gimp uses to add 16bit support and then Gimp will get support for it (in Gimp 3.0, in years from now), but this is completely beside the point. The point is that TheGimp SHOULD have had 16bit per channel support on 2.0 already. We are not in 1995 anymore.
As a home app to do a few web graphics or some home image manipulation, the Gimp is ok. But as a pro or pro-sumer digital photographer, Gimp is a *no go*.
I don't agree that lack of 16bit support makes the GIMP a toy. We never use the 16bit support in Photoshop at work (we're a newspaper - seriously, what sort of color do you think we can achieve?!?) - so that is no issue with the GIMP.
CMYK, on the other hand...
CMYK, on the other hand...
I scan images all the time, and quite often I come across an original whose colros are seriously degraded. 16 bits per channel is an absolute necessity here--so you can do some serious color shifting and processing, and still have a reasonably smooth tonal curve when you downsample to 8 bits per channel. If you try to do serious color corrections with 8-bit color channels, the result is usually banded so badly it's unusable.
I'm no professional, but I know enough to know that 8-bit color channels are only "good enough" when your colors are already just right--need tweak them much, and it's no longer adequate.
I'm no professional, but I know enough to know that 8-bit color channels are only "good enough" when your colors are already just right--need tweak them much, and it's no longer adequate.
Can't you use film-gimp?
For God's sake people, STOP suggestion FilmGimp everytime someone asks for 16bit support. FilmGimp is NOT Gimp anymore, it is very glued together with movie manipulation function-wise, not normal photography/scan/manipuation. It is not anymore what Gimp or Photoshop or PaintShopPro is, therefore it can't help us.
CinePaint is most frequently used to touch up frames on an individual basis. That hardly rules it out as a tool for photo-editing. It's greatest failure for the digital photographer is that it doesn't have all of the improvements that Gimp has made since the original fork (Not that it doesn't have some of them).
Just a reminder, FilmGimp was renamed <A HREF="http://cinepaint.sourceforge.net/" TITLE="sourceforge.net">CinePaint</a sourceforge.net>.
CinePaint supports 16 and 32 bits of color per channel (64 and 128 bit RGBA). IIRC CMYK is still a work in progress.
Yeah, and it looks like absolute crap (gtk 1.2) and it is just NOT a pure mutli-manipulation app like Gimp 2 or photoshop is. CinePaint/Filmgimp is not an option.
I'm incredibily disappointed how clueless you are
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 07:34 AM
Photoshop up till CS didn't out of the box support full 16bit. So up till just recently and including Photoshop 7below none of these "professionals" were using full 16bit editing when they used Photoshop. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. btw if you really need a Free version of Gimp that can do 16bit use Cinepaint. That does 32bit!
Now back to free software. You have a lot of freaking nerve criticizing the Gimp people. If 16bit is such a walk in the park thing to do feel free to code it yourself.
With rude ungrateful people like you its a wonder anyone codes for free.
Now back to free software. You have a lot of freaking nerve criticizing the Gimp people. If 16bit is such a walk in the park thing to do feel free to code it yourself.
With rude ungrateful people like you its a wonder anyone codes for free.
Please keep the lies elsewhere.
Photoshop had preliminary support for 16bit since PS 5.0.
It became fully usable on PS 6.
What was added on CS was simply some extra filters, support for 16bit was already there.
Photoshop had preliminary support for 16bit since PS 5.0.
It became fully usable on PS 6.
What was added on CS was simply some extra filters, support for 16bit was already there.
Fully usable if you happen not use layers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
Do you mean 16bits per colour, e.g. 655535 65535 65535 (white) or 16bits per pixel?
16 bits per channel, ie 16 bits per colour. An RGB image might be 48bpp, with RGBA and CMYK being 64bpp.
Craig Ringer
Craig Ringer
What are you using / how did you get that mac os X like doc on at the bottom of the screen shots?
-Pkj
-Pkj
That would have to be SuperKaramba
Looks far more like a gdesklet (gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org) based on the fact that it appears the authour is using XFCE.
Good guess<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)
It's true. I'm using XFCE 4 w/ the current gdesklets ("starterbar" is the desklet @ bottom of screen) ->
<A HREF="gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org" TITLE="newsforge.com">gdesklets website</a newsforge.com>
Brice
It's true. I'm using XFCE 4 w/ the current gdesklets ("starterbar" is the desklet @ bottom of screen) ->
<A HREF="gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org" TITLE="newsforge.com">gdesklets website</a newsforge.com>
Brice
Good guess<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)
It's true. I'm using XFCE 4 w/ the current gdesklets ("starterbar" is the desklet @ bottom of screen) ->
<A HREF="http://gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org/" TITLE="gnomedesktop.org">gdesklets website</a gnomedesktop.org>
Brice
It's true. I'm using XFCE 4 w/ the current gdesklets ("starterbar" is the desklet @ bottom of screen) ->
<A HREF="http://gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org/" TITLE="gnomedesktop.org">gdesklets website</a gnomedesktop.org>
Brice
Gimp 2.0 is nothing but a massive dissapointment!
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 05:09 AM
I dont get whats changed with the supposedly "new" interface? theres still 242694 square LIGHTYEARS of palettes clogging my screen.. Painter could be fixed WHY does Gimp have to continue the fu*king palettehell.. The point is to have a HUGE WORKSPACE with highly eficcient and streamlines palettes that take little space and/or stay out of the way.. all I see here is palettes taking 95% of the screenspace and a 100x100 pixel big picture to work in.. IT IS A DISGRACE!!
Re:Gimp 2.0 is nothing but a massive dissapointmen
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 08:53 AM
Silly troll, gimp's not for kids!
Re:Gimp 2.0 is nothing but a massive dissapointmen
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 10:48 AM
The GIMP sucks ass, and the idea of people migrating from photoshop to gimp sucks ass too!
When the article raved about the new interface... I was expecting a "new interface". But judging by the screenshots, I guess what the author really should have written is, "shiney new icons in GIMP 2.0"
The interface itself seems to be pretty much identical to me.
The interface itself seems to be pretty much identical to me.
I agree. There are no recognizable changes in the interface aside from using gtk 2 widgets. I like the gimp, but I have always felt like it's UI was a pain in the ass.
I was thinking the same thing. What new interface? The loaded words like 'huge improvement', 'polished', 'comfortable', 'friendly', and 'superior aesthetics' are contradicted by the screenshots to the right and below. The problem really is the fact that GTK is ugly, and always was. Instead of doing something about it, some software socialists go and build an entire desktop environment around it.
Instead of doing something about it, some software socialists go and build an entire desktop environment around it.
Darn tootin'! Those pesky software socialists have no right to put their stinky, ugly efforts out in the public for everyone to see! How dare they think they can write code and make us use it!
Oh... I don't have to use it? Or look at it? Hmm. Sorry. Guess that kinda blows that rant into small, bite-size fragments.
My whole point is that the folks behind GNOME where too caught up in their whacky socialist ideals that they had to reinvent the wheel when KDE was already (and still is) doing a much better job. All because of the QT license. And still to this day, Gnome and GTK suck visually. The programming interface is great, but it is ugly as hell. It never made any sense to me why people would take an ugly system and build a desktop around it.
software socialists
Bwaahahahahaaahaa! Priceless! And to top it of, why don't we have a look at what lurks at the diametrically opposite end of the specter: Software Randians(tm)(c)! Software to end all Software... Literally!
Sarcasm(which is sooo 90's, anyway) aside, I totally agree with your observation - some new icons and Xft is hardly enough to make a smeggin' difference. The article is way off, The Gimp per se is not. Way to go, The Gimp developers! Cheers!
Bwaahahahahaaahaa! Priceless! And to top it of, why don't we have a look at what lurks at the diametrically opposite end of the specter: Software Randians(tm)(c)! Software to end all Software... Literally!
Sarcasm(which is sooo 90's, anyway) aside, I totally agree with your observation - some new icons and Xft is hardly enough to make a smeggin' difference. The article is way off, The Gimp per se is not. Way to go, The Gimp developers! Cheers!
Call me stupid (I am) but the ONLY reason why I don't use GIMP is that it's not MDI-oriented like Photoshop (i.e. one super-window with children windows) and the menus are just too inconvenient to use.
That's exactly what the new design has, all of the dialogs are dockable and tabbable (like mozillla)"children" of the parent toolbox. You don't have the big frame around the resulting effect, but it's an even better concept than PS from my experience using it for the past few months.
You can't please everyone. The primary reason that I don't use Photoshop (or any other MDI program for that matter) is that stupid MDI idea. Even Microsoft figured out it was a bad idea, when they moved from the Windows 3.11 program manager to the Windows 95 explorer.
MDI ruins the whole idea of splitting the screen up in different windows, to be able to use different programs at the same time. Eg Gimp and a web browser when doing webdesign.
MDI ruins the whole idea of splitting the screen up in different windows, to be able to use different programs at the same time. Eg Gimp and a web browser when doing webdesign.
It's been a while since I used the Mac version of Photoshop, but last time I did, it didn't have the big, gray super-window. The whole Mac GUI has historically eliminated the need for one, though, because the application's menus go up on the main menu bar instead of sitting inside the application window.
Which (to go on a tangent) I expect will make The GIMP, even this new version, unpopular with Mac users. It puts menus in every document window, very contrary to the feel of a typical Mac app.
Which (to go on a tangent) I expect will make The GIMP, even this new version, unpopular with Mac users. It puts menus in every document window, very contrary to the feel of a typical Mac app.
Exactly. The Mac has never had conventional MDI. Of course, you could argue that since it only has one menu bar, that it's ALWAYS in some super-MDI mode where the entire desktop takes the place of the grey super-window. The super-window just so happens to be transparent and 100% the size of your workspace.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
If they wanted to, they could probably do some kind of hack where it puts the menu bar at the top of the screen instead of in the window. Apple's OS X Java implementation has support for that, and if I recall correctly, KDE has an option to force menubars to the top of the screen...
If they wanted to, they could probably do some kind of hack where it puts the menu bar at the top of the screen instead of in the window. Apple's OS X Java implementation has support for that, and if I recall correctly, KDE has an option to force menubars to the top of the screen...
You'll hate Photoshop on MacOS then - no MDI.
Personally I hate the old super-window/child-window style MDI, though I think there are good uses for tab-style MDIs.
Personally I hate the old super-window/child-window style MDI, though I think there are good uses for tab-style MDIs.
A lot of the changes can't be expressed through a few simple screenshots.
The menu layout is a lot more intuitive. The docked palettes also make a big difference -- you can have lots of tools readily available without cluttering up your desktop, reducing the area usable for the image window.
A lot of the changes are incremental improvements, but they do make a difference.
The menu layout is a lot more intuitive. The docked palettes also make a big difference -- you can have lots of tools readily available without cluttering up your desktop, reducing the area usable for the image window.
A lot of the changes are incremental improvements, but they do make a difference.
Just a thanks from a happy user and a hat off to the developers. I like the changes the main screen and the combined palete/brushes etc window is a good idea. I can't wait until it gets checked into debian sid! I've used the GIMP for years and I think my friend how is a graphic designer will finally dump Adobe photoshop since there is CMYK support and you can get the GIMP for windows. The gimp has always been one of the greatest applications the free software movement ever had.
-Jeff
PS: to the luser that posted that "the gimp is nothing but a massive dissapointment", why don't you go write your own free paint program you fscking troll.
-Jeff
PS: to the luser that posted that "the gimp is nothing but a massive dissapointment", why don't you go write your own free paint program you fscking troll.
What my graphic design friends all ask for in Gimp is Vector drawing support. But I don't have any problems with Gimp myself.
If you're that ticked off by the guy who posted that "the gimp is nothing but a massive disappointment," you'd better brace yourself for when you show it to your graphic designer friend.
Woo-hoo. Dockable palettes. Limited CMYK support. A slightly improved text tool. This is, what, Photoshop 5? When was that -- three years ago?
Don't get me wrong. It's great that it's open source, it's great that it's free, it's great that there's a fallback alternative to Photoshop. But Photoshop... This ain't Photoshop, man. Don't kid yourself. It's just not in the same league.
Woo-hoo. Dockable palettes. Limited CMYK support. A slightly improved text tool. This is, what, Photoshop 5? When was that -- three years ago?
Don't get me wrong. It's great that it's open source, it's great that it's free, it's great that there's a fallback alternative to Photoshop. But Photoshop... This ain't Photoshop, man. Don't kid yourself. It's just not in the same league.
No, thank god it is not Photoshop.
What the Gimp lacks when compared to Photoshop:
- The heavy price tag
- The dreadful MDI user-interface
- All the Adobe loving fanatics
What the Gimp lacks when compared to Photoshop:
- The heavy price tag
- The dreadful MDI user-interface
- All the Adobe loving fanatics
Yeah, man! Right on! Other ways that the GIMP is better:
- Not weighted down by all those pesky "features"
- Who wants professional documentation and support? Give me a newsgroup any day!
- Interfaces are better when a bunch of amateur designers get together and make them up. Why waste all that money on usability testing?
- Open source fanatics are SO much cooler than Adobe fanatics
It doesn't print yet...
Yes, it does. But it needs gimp-print-4.2.x from gimp-print.sf.net.
It wont work with gimp-print-4.3.x or newer yet.
It wont work with gimp-print-4.3.x or newer yet.
Your ignorance is staggering, and the very fact that you'd sink yourself to the level you seem to despise some much is mind boggling. Please understand what you are talking about before your brain tells your fingers what to type. It'll save yourself (and everyone else) much time and frustration.
Here, educate yourself:
luser<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/loo'zr/<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/n./ A user; esp. one who is also a loser. (luser and loser are pronounced identically.) This word was coined around 1975 at MIT. Under ITS, when you first walked up to a terminal at MIT and typed Control-Z to get the computer's attention, it printed out some status information, including how many people were already using the computer; it might print "14 users", for example. Someone thought it would be a great joke to patch the system to print "14 losers" instead. There ensued a great controversy, as some of the users didn't particularly want to be called losers to their faces every time they used the computer. For a while several hackers struggled covertly, each changing the message behind the back of the others; any time you logged into the computer it was even money whether it would say "users" or "losers". Finally, someone tried the compromise "lusers", and it stuck. Later one of the ITS machines supported `luser' as a request-for-help command. ITS died the death in mid-1990, except as a museum piece; the usage lives on, however, and the term `luser' is often seen in program comments.
Here, educate yourself:
luser<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/loo'zr/<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/n./ A user; esp. one who is also a loser. (luser and loser are pronounced identically.) This word was coined around 1975 at MIT. Under ITS, when you first walked up to a terminal at MIT and typed Control-Z to get the computer's attention, it printed out some status information, including how many people were already using the computer; it might print "14 users", for example. Someone thought it would be a great joke to patch the system to print "14 losers" instead. There ensued a great controversy, as some of the users didn't particularly want to be called losers to their faces every time they used the computer. For a while several hackers struggled covertly, each changing the message behind the back of the others; any time you logged into the computer it was even money whether it would say "users" or "losers". Finally, someone tried the compromise "lusers", and it stuck. Later one of the ITS machines supported `luser' as a request-for-help command. ITS died the death in mid-1990, except as a museum piece; the usage lives on, however, and the term `luser' is often seen in program comments.
I want _ONE_ window to do all the work.
Is too hard?
I think many people will migrate from Photoshop to GIMP only if they implement one option called "Put-all-those-crappy-palettes-and-all-those-wind<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> ws-in-a-single-window".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:þ
Is too hard?
I think many people will migrate from Photoshop to GIMP only if they implement one option called "Put-all-those-crappy-palettes-and-all-those-wind<nobr>o<wbr></nobr> ws-in-a-single-window".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:þ
my thoughts exactly
So did a friend of mine, so I wrote a 10 line script to start it up in one window, MDI style.
http://www.celebrityshine.com/~kfr/mdi.jpg
Note: this is Gimp 1.2, it would probably work even better in 2.0 with it's dockable palettes.
http://www.celebrityshine.com/~kfr/mdi.jpg
Note: this is Gimp 1.2, it would probably work even better in 2.0 with it's dockable palettes.
That's pretty brilliant! Do you have that script available for download?
MDI (Multi Document Interface) is a silly concept where a single window does the job of the window manager, obviously doing it worse (code replication, bad implementation, inconsistency). An MDI window breaks the metaphor of the desktop, since a window could contain more than one document.
It's remainder of the UI in the 1990s, which is fortunately also being dumped on other architectures, in favour of a document oriented metaphor.
So, is really Photoshop that should change its UI and conform to The GIMP, not the other way around just to please Photoshop users.
It's remainder of the UI in the 1990s, which is fortunately also being dumped on other architectures, in favour of a document oriented metaphor.
So, is really Photoshop that should change its UI and conform to The GIMP, not the other way around just to please Photoshop users.
It's ergonomics. When you click by mistake, between two gimp palette, you're out of the app.
Graphist tend to spend many hours workin in photoshop. This "out of the app" phenomena becomes very fast unbearable.
That's the _ONLY_ thing that keep photoshop in place for open-source friendly graphist. But Sadly Gimp is a developper-who-style-himself-as-a -graphist thing, real professionnal graphist have a lot to say about Gimp ergonomics.
The fact that MDI is burdened with a clunky implementation, is a completely different problem and one that must be solved.
Graphist tend to spend many hours workin in photoshop. This "out of the app" phenomena becomes very fast unbearable.
That's the _ONLY_ thing that keep photoshop in place for open-source friendly graphist. But Sadly Gimp is a developper-who-style-himself-as-a -graphist thing, real professionnal graphist have a lot to say about Gimp ergonomics.
The fact that MDI is burdened with a clunky implementation, is a completely different problem and one that must be solved.
Nice rant, except that the GIMP doesn't follow the document oriented metaphor. Are those palettes and tools documents? Nope. Yet they all have separate windows. And when you want to apply, say a filter, to an image, what do you do?
In an MDI application, or a SDI application where all the tools are attached to each docuemnt, you know that you can go to the menu and perform an action on the currently active document.
GIMP? No such functionality. To do document specific things you need to use the right mouse button, which pops up a large menu that has every possible applicable function. This is cluttered, not intutive, and not simple. In an MDI app, you can go to the submenu that you want, without having to open and scroll through the rest of the menu items.
The interface is the biggest reason why I can't stand gimp.
In an MDI application, or a SDI application where all the tools are attached to each docuemnt, you know that you can go to the menu and perform an action on the currently active document.
GIMP? No such functionality. To do document specific things you need to use the right mouse button, which pops up a large menu that has every possible applicable function. This is cluttered, not intutive, and not simple. In an MDI app, you can go to the submenu that you want, without having to open and scroll through the rest of the menu items.
The interface is the biggest reason why I can't stand gimp.
Breaks the NON existant metaphor of the desktop??
LOL. That metaphor never really existed. It's not a desktop, and never has been.
You know why? because it's a damn computer that's why.
Since when does a person store their tools in little buttons arranged perfectly in rectangular areas on rectangular sheets of non-standard-sized paper on their desk???
Come on. Gimp's windows are not documents to the user, and shouldn't be.
And by the way, if you wanted to have a thorough desktop metaphor, you'd need to have clutter. You'd need to emulate scissors and glue and stamps and magnifying glasses and gradient tools(?) and filters (!???) lying around on a horizontal surface, with no containing window!
What about menus? What about layers view????? Do these things have anything to do w/ the desktop metaphor???? NO. They are related to other metaphors, very loosely, perhaps, but not a standard desktop.
Artists don't actually use standard desktops! They use art desks, tracing desks, canvases, and so on. Photoshop incorporates some of these elements, but goes much further and introduces entirely new experiences of its own... which makes is powerful to USE FOR ARTISTS. Gimp attempts to emulate much of photoshop's functionality, but arbitrarily and geekily decided that it should break usefulness for artists by making them think about window management (what the hell we care about that?!).
And another thing, artists don't slip and miss when grabbing tools off their desk real life, as much as they slip and miss and hide windows in gimp. THIS IS VERY FRUSTRATING!
Obviously, the metaphor of the desktop is non-sensical in today's computer environment, and will remain so until we develop some kind of advanced 3D interface with a glove. Even then, I think as a user that I would not want a pure desktop metaphor.
It's a computer. It's supposed to offer a BETTER-than-real environment. In some ways, it is good for UI's to be a little more like reality, as long as the parts taken from reality are advantageous, and not disadvantageous.
Give me the good things from reality and leave out the bad. Clutter in real life is bad. Gimp has clutter. This is bad.
As an artist, I couldn't care less about your proud declarations of developer innovativeness or philosophical purity. Give me practicality!
LOL. That metaphor never really existed. It's not a desktop, and never has been.
You know why? because it's a damn computer that's why.
Since when does a person store their tools in little buttons arranged perfectly in rectangular areas on rectangular sheets of non-standard-sized paper on their desk???
Come on. Gimp's windows are not documents to the user, and shouldn't be.
And by the way, if you wanted to have a thorough desktop metaphor, you'd need to have clutter. You'd need to emulate scissors and glue and stamps and magnifying glasses and gradient tools(?) and filters (!???) lying around on a horizontal surface, with no containing window!
What about menus? What about layers view????? Do these things have anything to do w/ the desktop metaphor???? NO. They are related to other metaphors, very loosely, perhaps, but not a standard desktop.
Artists don't actually use standard desktops! They use art desks, tracing desks, canvases, and so on. Photoshop incorporates some of these elements, but goes much further and introduces entirely new experiences of its own... which makes is powerful to USE FOR ARTISTS. Gimp attempts to emulate much of photoshop's functionality, but arbitrarily and geekily decided that it should break usefulness for artists by making them think about window management (what the hell we care about that?!).
And another thing, artists don't slip and miss when grabbing tools off their desk real life, as much as they slip and miss and hide windows in gimp. THIS IS VERY FRUSTRATING!
Obviously, the metaphor of the desktop is non-sensical in today's computer environment, and will remain so until we develop some kind of advanced 3D interface with a glove. Even then, I think as a user that I would not want a pure desktop metaphor.
It's a computer. It's supposed to offer a BETTER-than-real environment. In some ways, it is good for UI's to be a little more like reality, as long as the parts taken from reality are advantageous, and not disadvantageous.
Give me the good things from reality and leave out the bad. Clutter in real life is bad. Gimp has clutter. This is bad.
As an artist, I couldn't care less about your proud declarations of developer innovativeness or philosophical purity. Give me practicality!
Fine, but the GIMP still needs work. My biggest problem is that its 8000 palettes suck up all the room on my taskbar, and make doing anything else a pain when GIMP is open.
Plus, to get additional working space, I have to move all the palettes out of the way individually.
The dockability is a good start on fixing this, however.. I'll have to see how it works out.
What about drawing tools ? Are there any, or is it sill impossible to simply draw lines or arcs ?
What about drawing tools ? Are there any, or is it sill impossible to simply draw lines or arcs ?
Not impossible, just obsecure. For lines anyway, I think you click at one end, hold down shift, and click at the other end. I expect it's in the docs somewhere (not that I read those things either).
--
James G
The easiest way to do what you're talking about is to use paths.
Just draw the shape you want, select the brush you want, etc. and then trace path.
You can turn selections into paths, also (I can't remember the button, look around)
Just draw the shape you want, select the brush you want, etc. and then trace path.
You can turn selections into paths, also (I can't remember the button, look around)
Dude, even Gimp 1.2 can draw lines and arcs.
You really should read a book on the Gimp
(like <A HREF="http://manual.gimp.org/" TITLE="gimp.org">manual.gimp.org</a gimp.org>), or perhaps just read the "Tip of the Day" that appear when you start up.
For example, to draw a line (with pretty much ANY drawing tool, including eraser, pencil, brush, and I think even rubber stamp), just hold SHIFT and then click the endpoint.
SHEESH!
-bill!
You really should read a book on the Gimp
(like <A HREF="http://manual.gimp.org/" TITLE="gimp.org">manual.gimp.org</a gimp.org>), or perhaps just read the "Tip of the Day" that appear when you start up.
For example, to draw a line (with pretty much ANY drawing tool, including eraser, pencil, brush, and I think even rubber stamp), just hold SHIFT and then click the endpoint.
SHEESH!
-bill!
Great to see things evolving but.............
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 09:04 AM
Can it draw lines and circles yet without invoking a centuries-old spell while the phase of the moon and level of the tides are just right?
I love Linux, and I work at loving GIMP, but it's hard to look past the fact that Mac software, for example, has had this thing called a 'line tool' and a 'circle tool' not to mention WYSIWYG text manipulation since the early 1990s.
And no, I can't get Photoshop running under Crossover Office. It's no fun to use without window slider widgets.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
I love Linux, and I work at loving GIMP, but it's hard to look past the fact that Mac software, for example, has had this thing called a 'line tool' and a 'circle tool' not to mention WYSIWYG text manipulation since the early 1990s.
And no, I can't get Photoshop running under Crossover Office. It's no fun to use without window slider widgets.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
Re:Great to see things evolving but.............
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 03:40 PM
Did they remove lines and circles? For Gimp 1.2, it is easy:
lines: select the tool you want to draw a line with (pencil, paintbrush, airbrush), click at one end of the line then shift-click at the other end.
circles (and rectangles): select the only icon looking like a circle (rectangle). This is a selection tool, but it works fine for drawing a circle too. Draw your circle. Now, select edit -> stroke (S key on my setup).
Sure you could save one key press if there was a seperate circle button on the menu, but that's no worse than windows where one click could be saved every time a program is started, just by removing that stupid start button.
lines: select the tool you want to draw a line with (pencil, paintbrush, airbrush), click at one end of the line then shift-click at the other end.
circles (and rectangles): select the only icon looking like a circle (rectangle). This is a selection tool, but it works fine for drawing a circle too. Draw your circle. Now, select edit -> stroke (S key on my setup).
Sure you could save one key press if there was a seperate circle button on the menu, but that's no worse than windows where one click could be saved every time a program is started, just by removing that stupid start button.
Re:Great to see things evolving but.............
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 27, 2004 07:29 AM
Being a Mac user, you will have to re-explain these instructions using words with only 1 syllable. Otherwise, he or she wont be able to understand what you are talking about.
Re:Great to see things evolving but.............
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 11:27 PM
It was always my impression that Gimp was a photo editor more than it was a drawing tool. There are more powerfull illustrator applications out there that would suit you better, perhaps.
Stop flaming. GIMP is great.
Developers have made an incredible effort improving the GUI usability and stability.
Now we can say that GIMP is _really_ usable and, why not, enjoyable.
Keep the good work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
Developers have made an incredible effort improving the GUI usability and stability.
Now we can say that GIMP is _really_ usable and, why not, enjoyable.
Keep the good work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
don't forget GIMP 2 is GIMP , not Photoshop
NOT illustrator
nOT painter
it's GIMP. with its own qualities and defaults.
it's not here to draw circles or arc
(well, in fact you can, with some use of selection, path and others fillings<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,but it's not its business)
don't forget a thing, GIMP 2 is not the end of gimp, it's just the start for next gimps
about 16bits by channel ? yes, developpers knows it will be a good thing(tm), there are starts of development (gegl project). there also a tons of others features waiting.
the interface is not only "screenshots"
'palettes' can be "docked", and the workspace can be completely set by the user.
no! Gimp 2 is not a "one window application", why ? I know it's sad for many, I know I know, people are crying out loud, but GIMP was not conceived for only Microsoft Windows
there are tons of interface or windowmanager which JUSTIFY the use of multiple windows. and it will not change.
BUT, please try gimp 2 with openmind , I swear you, the docking of palettes change many things.
and don't forget in the unix world, there are windowmanagers like windowmaker, openbox and others, and the very common "virtual desktop" concepts.
photoshop on Mac os X (and os9 before) ALSO has a similar "multi-windowed" interface, with NO "root window". ho the amazing surpriiiiise.. no it's old.
so what ?
noone will force you, it's only a freedom
a freedom to quietly use it and love it
or the freedom to quietly not use it and hate it.
okay ?
now, please, and if we're going back to the adaptation of "grokking gimp" to gimp2 ?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
NOT illustrator
nOT painter
it's GIMP. with its own qualities and defaults.
it's not here to draw circles or arc
(well, in fact you can, with some use of selection, path and others fillings<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,but it's not its business)
don't forget a thing, GIMP 2 is not the end of gimp, it's just the start for next gimps
about 16bits by channel ? yes, developpers knows it will be a good thing(tm), there are starts of development (gegl project). there also a tons of others features waiting.
the interface is not only "screenshots"
'palettes' can be "docked", and the workspace can be completely set by the user.
no! Gimp 2 is not a "one window application", why ? I know it's sad for many, I know I know, people are crying out loud, but GIMP was not conceived for only Microsoft Windows
there are tons of interface or windowmanager which JUSTIFY the use of multiple windows. and it will not change.
BUT, please try gimp 2 with openmind , I swear you, the docking of palettes change many things.
and don't forget in the unix world, there are windowmanagers like windowmaker, openbox and others, and the very common "virtual desktop" concepts.
photoshop on Mac os X (and os9 before) ALSO has a similar "multi-windowed" interface, with NO "root window". ho the amazing surpriiiiise.. no it's old.
so what ?
noone will force you, it's only a freedom
a freedom to quietly use it and love it
or the freedom to quietly not use it and hate it.
okay ?
now, please, and if we're going back to the adaptation of "grokking gimp" to gimp2 ?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
Hm.. if yo are too lame to use GIMP, get back to xp, use photoshop, and enjoy! Please all the lames here get away and stop flamin. Do better, or shut up.
I use GIMP since 1 year, an it's a perfect tool. v1.3 (pre2.0) is the best ever. thanks to all the developers for it. And about the 'new interfaces'. It really renewed, if some lame cannot realize it, its his problem.
-- hungarian guy called slink (gabo@mail.index.hu)
I use GIMP since 1 year, an it's a perfect tool. v1.3 (pre2.0) is the best ever. thanks to all the developers for it. And about the 'new interfaces'. It really renewed, if some lame cannot realize it, its his problem.
-- hungarian guy called slink (gabo@mail.index.hu)
Interesting: if someone wants more ergonomic and easier to use approach, then he or she is a lamer and should be banned from the community forever...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D Gods...
Now listen up: some people like GIMP the way it is, others want it more like the programs they used to work with in the past. Is that wrong? I thought Open Software is about freedom of choice. If so, then the developers should LISTEN to the users and introduce such option; otherwise we have Microsoft all over again. Why? Because it is the USER that is the final judge of one's work. The User, who, at least the majority of them, does not want to be kept in awe by revolutionary new code components, techniques, kernel changes et. al., but to work productively and enjoy it. Technological advancement has its merits, but it should SERVE the ordinary User, not to be an end in itself.
IOW: I like the direction GIMP is taking, but I'd like it even more should the developers give people more choice in terms of UI and app integration with different WM's than GNOME. AND, should anyone accuse me of extreme KDE-ism, I prefer Enlightenment.
Now listen up: some people like GIMP the way it is, others want it more like the programs they used to work with in the past. Is that wrong? I thought Open Software is about freedom of choice. If so, then the developers should LISTEN to the users and introduce such option; otherwise we have Microsoft all over again. Why? Because it is the USER that is the final judge of one's work. The User, who, at least the majority of them, does not want to be kept in awe by revolutionary new code components, techniques, kernel changes et. al., but to work productively and enjoy it. Technological advancement has its merits, but it should SERVE the ordinary User, not to be an end in itself.
IOW: I like the direction GIMP is taking, but I'd like it even more should the developers give people more choice in terms of UI and app integration with different WM's than GNOME. AND, should anyone accuse me of extreme KDE-ism, I prefer Enlightenment.
You should try to think if you send anything on public forum.
I know... it's maybe very hard 4 you to understand that
project needs low-end-users sugestions but it's true.
Nice day 2 you... even if you have other plans.
www.ender.informatica.agh.edu.pl
I know... it's maybe very hard 4 you to understand that
project needs low-end-users sugestions but it's true.
Nice day 2 you... even if you have other plans.
www.ender.informatica.agh.edu.pl
90% of the photoshop users that complain about The Gimp should bear in mind that they are (probably) using an illigal version of photoshop.
GIMP is GOOD and FREE
Photoshop is better but EXPENSIVE!
GIMP is GOOD and FREE
Photoshop is better but EXPENSIVE!
Free beer?
Well, Jasc Paintshop Pro works fine for me. The GIMP lost the race and that is also because of its strange interface and organisational problems.
Well, Jasc Paintshop Pro works fine for me. The GIMP lost the race and that is also because of its strange interface and organisational problems.
I second this FOR SURE!
With the money windows users save on not buying photoshop, they could buy a second graphics card AND monitor to dock palettes on and then everyone could be happy and stop flaming the GIMP.
GIMP RULES 4EVA
With the money windows users save on not buying photoshop, they could buy a second graphics card AND monitor to dock palettes on and then everyone could be happy and stop flaming the GIMP.
GIMP RULES 4EVA
Apparently, author didn't know much about Gimp 1.2
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 09:02 PM
My biggest complaint about this article (other than not showing a screenshot of the new text tool!) was the seeming lack of knowledge of features The Gimp ALREADY HAD, and are not new in 2.0!
For instance:
The Undo tool has become a favorite of mine. With it, you're now given an overview of the steps (such as selections, fills, and moves) that make up the image, along with the state and a preview of the image as a consequence of a particular step.
Yep, Gimp 1.2 had this. Dialogs->Undo History. Maybe it's just more obvious in Gimp 2.0?
Another one:
I'd like to see a built-in "save for Web" function with which you can preview an image next to the original under different GIF, PNG, and JPEG settings.
Well, I guess in one way the author is right. There's no easy way to say "What will this picture look like when saved in 256 color crappy GIF format?" Well, except to actually REDUCE the number of colors to 256... and THEN save! I guess they want to check the quality of Gimp's automagic "Export" option when you try to save an image as GIF that cannot be, naturally. (e.g., it contains layers, it has >256 colors, etc.)
When you save as JPEG, and want to change the quality of the JPEG compression, you can have it preview the results, though! (Again, this is in Gimp 1.2!)
Regarding selections:
I also noticed that if you have an active selection, you cannot start a selection tool from within the selection.
Umm... in Gimp (1.2), try holding SHIFT, CONTROL or SHIFT+CONTROL before clicking. In later 1.2 versions (like 1.2.3 and 1.2.5), you'll notice little "+", "-" and 'intersect' shapes appear next to the mouse pointer.
Also, the Quickmask is an EXCELLENT way to add/subtract from a selection. (Click the little red square at the bottom left corner of your Gimp window in 1.2... I guess it's a little selection outline in Gimp 2.0)
The entire image will turn red, except the stuff you have selected. Now you can paint... paint white to select more. Paint black to select less. Paint grey for a semi-transparent selection! Use the selection tools to cut/paste and manipulate the Quickmask! (Select your own selection! It's crazy!) Use filters and scripts on the Quickmask to make all sorts of crazy selections.
Then, go back to regular (non-Quickmask) selection mode, and do whatever you were going to with the final selection!
All of this stuff is documented, you know!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:^) The Gimp User's Manual has been available for free, online at <A HREF="http://manual.gimp.org/" TITLE="gimp.org">manual.gimp.org</a gimp.org> for a very long time. Did people just never notice it?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;^)
Enjoy!
-bill!
(who has done a number of presentations at LUGs and other user groups about The Gimp!)
For instance:
The Undo tool has become a favorite of mine. With it, you're now given an overview of the steps (such as selections, fills, and moves) that make up the image, along with the state and a preview of the image as a consequence of a particular step.
Yep, Gimp 1.2 had this. Dialogs->Undo History. Maybe it's just more obvious in Gimp 2.0?
Another one:
I'd like to see a built-in "save for Web" function with which you can preview an image next to the original under different GIF, PNG, and JPEG settings.
Well, I guess in one way the author is right. There's no easy way to say "What will this picture look like when saved in 256 color crappy GIF format?" Well, except to actually REDUCE the number of colors to 256... and THEN save! I guess they want to check the quality of Gimp's automagic "Export" option when you try to save an image as GIF that cannot be, naturally. (e.g., it contains layers, it has >256 colors, etc.)
When you save as JPEG, and want to change the quality of the JPEG compression, you can have it preview the results, though! (Again, this is in Gimp 1.2!)
Regarding selections:
I also noticed that if you have an active selection, you cannot start a selection tool from within the selection.
Umm... in Gimp (1.2), try holding SHIFT, CONTROL or SHIFT+CONTROL before clicking. In later 1.2 versions (like 1.2.3 and 1.2.5), you'll notice little "+", "-" and 'intersect' shapes appear next to the mouse pointer.
Also, the Quickmask is an EXCELLENT way to add/subtract from a selection. (Click the little red square at the bottom left corner of your Gimp window in 1.2... I guess it's a little selection outline in Gimp 2.0)
The entire image will turn red, except the stuff you have selected. Now you can paint... paint white to select more. Paint black to select less. Paint grey for a semi-transparent selection! Use the selection tools to cut/paste and manipulate the Quickmask! (Select your own selection! It's crazy!) Use filters and scripts on the Quickmask to make all sorts of crazy selections.
Then, go back to regular (non-Quickmask) selection mode, and do whatever you were going to with the final selection!
All of this stuff is documented, you know!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:^) The Gimp User's Manual has been available for free, online at <A HREF="http://manual.gimp.org/" TITLE="gimp.org">manual.gimp.org</a gimp.org> for a very long time. Did people just never notice it?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;^)
Enjoy!
-bill!
(who has done a number of presentations at LUGs and other user groups about The Gimp!)
16 Bit Support:
Unfortuneatly the original gimp was hardcoded 8bit... It is going to take a lot of work to get a 16bit version working - The plan at this stage is to add extra stuff at the same time (vector layers etc)... The current plan is to start work on this in about the middle of the year after a 2.2 release. The team expects the integration of the 16bit background to take a year. The only this will be shorter is if the project picks up more developers. In the meantime your options are a commercial package or Cinepaint. The Cinepaint team intends to give the UI of that app a major overhaul soon.
MDI dialogs etc...
There is a bit of platform arrogance going on here. The gimp works fairly well on most Unix window managers (It is primarily a unix based program)... Multiple desktops allows you to run it by itself on a seperate desktop if you desire and application grouping (in KDE) means you can minimize/restore every window in one action. Menus are tearable and (in KDE) you can make sure a particular window stays on top. I know you can't do any of this in Windows/Mac but frankly most unix users (most of the developers) don't care.
updates: I have been using the developement releases for about 3 months. The changes mean a lot more in practice than they probably do just looking at some screenshots. The docking system could be better (collapsable panels would be nice) but are a big improvement on the previous version - I especially like the new histogram Docker<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).
The biggest changes though are under the hood and wont have a direct affect on the user. The code has been cleaned up heaps... To the point where a new developer could have some hope of figuring out what is going on internally. This means that development should continue at a faster pace than it has in the last few years.
Unfortuneatly the original gimp was hardcoded 8bit... It is going to take a lot of work to get a 16bit version working - The plan at this stage is to add extra stuff at the same time (vector layers etc)... The current plan is to start work on this in about the middle of the year after a 2.2 release. The team expects the integration of the 16bit background to take a year. The only this will be shorter is if the project picks up more developers. In the meantime your options are a commercial package or Cinepaint. The Cinepaint team intends to give the UI of that app a major overhaul soon.
MDI dialogs etc...
There is a bit of platform arrogance going on here. The gimp works fairly well on most Unix window managers (It is primarily a unix based program)... Multiple desktops allows you to run it by itself on a seperate desktop if you desire and application grouping (in KDE) means you can minimize/restore every window in one action. Menus are tearable and (in KDE) you can make sure a particular window stays on top. I know you can't do any of this in Windows/Mac but frankly most unix users (most of the developers) don't care.
updates: I have been using the developement releases for about 3 months. The changes mean a lot more in practice than they probably do just looking at some screenshots. The docking system could be better (collapsable panels would be nice) but are a big improvement on the previous version - I especially like the new histogram Docker<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).
The biggest changes though are under the hood and wont have a direct affect on the user. The code has been cleaned up heaps... To the point where a new developer could have some hope of figuring out what is going on internally. This means that development should continue at a faster pace than it has in the last few years.
As a Mac/Photoshop user, there is absolutely nothing here that makes me want to switch. It all sounds like yet another hugely overhyped peice of crap from the open "sores" community. Thanks for nothing!
Just switch off, and throw your keyboard out! You badly lack of talent for a troll.
I use Photoshop 7 at a museum for entomological work
but find it less intuitive to use than The Gimp. I actually like all the right clicking and find that working in very fine detail is easier with The Gimp.
Try blowing up an image as large as possible and feather a selection by a pixel or two. The Gimp allows finer granularity than Photoshop. Paths are easier to manipulate in The Gimp.
In Linux right click on the toolbox or layers palette and choose to keep it on top at all times. Once you learn how to use a Linux desktop well you can hop around and work very quickly.
I miss the duplicate layer icon on the layers palette
when I use Photoshop and simply find The Gimp a lot more user-friendly.
With The Gimp I can call up a blur dialog and decide to do something else first without cancelling it. In Photoshop you have to cancel a dilague box before doing anything else.
The Gimp just gives you more freedom to get what is in your head onto canvas in its slightly anarchic way. Since when has an artist's studio been an orderly affair like a dentist's waiting room?
The Gimp is a superb program. Hard to believe something so good is a gift. I can't thank the developers enough.
but find it less intuitive to use than The Gimp. I actually like all the right clicking and find that working in very fine detail is easier with The Gimp.
Try blowing up an image as large as possible and feather a selection by a pixel or two. The Gimp allows finer granularity than Photoshop. Paths are easier to manipulate in The Gimp.
In Linux right click on the toolbox or layers palette and choose to keep it on top at all times. Once you learn how to use a Linux desktop well you can hop around and work very quickly.
I miss the duplicate layer icon on the layers palette
when I use Photoshop and simply find The Gimp a lot more user-friendly.
With The Gimp I can call up a blur dialog and decide to do something else first without cancelling it. In Photoshop you have to cancel a dilague box before doing anything else.
The Gimp just gives you more freedom to get what is in your head onto canvas in its slightly anarchic way. Since when has an artist's studio been an orderly affair like a dentist's waiting room?
The Gimp is a superb program. Hard to believe something so good is a gift. I can't thank the developers enough.
It can't possibly manage to be harder to use than Photoshop is....
While the multiple-window approach of Gimp may annoy a large population of windows users, bear in mind that this style of interface makes a great deal of sense in many unix environments. Under windows, it isn't easy to move windows around, have them stay on top of other windows, or use them as "panes" which don't become occluded by other portions of the UI. Virtual desktops are also useful in gaining more screen real estate. Keep in mind that hotkeys are much faster than clicking buttons and menus as well--it's really quite simple to pull up dialogs and windows as necessary, then hide them again.
Also remember that a great deal "correct" or "intuitive" UI design is actually based on what the user has had prior experience with. As someone who has to interact with Windows in the workplace, I find myself annoyed at the "inefficient" design and "nonintuitive" UI of Photoshop and Paint Shop Pro. This doesn't mean that any one of these systems is necessarily inferior, but rather that they are not what one is accustomed to. With time, however, one adapts to these systems until they become natural and fluid.
While the Gimp's UI is different than most Windows and Macintosh programs, I believe that it is an effective and powerful approach to image editing. There are numerous shortcomings in the application, but there are comparable flaws in other editors. It really comes down to whether or not you prefer paying $300+ for a copy of Photoshop and using it's extensive library of filters and (also expensive but powerful) plugins, or using a free, effective image editor with somewhat less refined functionality.
--aphyr
Also remember that a great deal "correct" or "intuitive" UI design is actually based on what the user has had prior experience with. As someone who has to interact with Windows in the workplace, I find myself annoyed at the "inefficient" design and "nonintuitive" UI of Photoshop and Paint Shop Pro. This doesn't mean that any one of these systems is necessarily inferior, but rather that they are not what one is accustomed to. With time, however, one adapts to these systems until they become natural and fluid.
While the Gimp's UI is different than most Windows and Macintosh programs, I believe that it is an effective and powerful approach to image editing. There are numerous shortcomings in the application, but there are comparable flaws in other editors. It really comes down to whether or not you prefer paying $300+ for a copy of Photoshop and using it's extensive library of filters and (also expensive but powerful) plugins, or using a free, effective image editor with somewhat less refined functionality.
--aphyr
Selections
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 26, 2004 01:23 AMJust as you can use Shift-Click when selecting to add selections together, you can use Ctrl-Click to take parts of a selection away.
(Note that shift-click and ctrl-click appear to be overloaded, shift is also the way to make a uniform selection (e.g. a square), and ctrl seems to tread the point of the click as the center of the selection. They work normally with the lasso tool.)
#