9 ms·

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 ...

by TekMol 8y ago

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 filters etc? OMG, that is archaic!'.

yoz-y 8y ago
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.
- mixmastamyk 8y ago
  GEGL was mostly done in 2.10.
  - Doxin 8y ago
    Porting all the filters and whatnot is still going on however.
lucb1e 8y ago
I've used GIMP for years but I have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps it's not the #1 priority because you're one of a small percentage of people who need it? While I'm not someone who needs image editing professionally or who makes amazing things with it, I did take my time to learn GIMP properly for my use-cases, and the things I find lacking do not include "non-destructive adjustment layers".
- jasonjayr 8y ago
  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, and the original image)
  - lucb1e 8y ago
    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.
    - dirkgently 8y ago
      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.
      - lucb1e 8y ago
        What I wonder is if they try to work on the features they claim to want so desperately (number one priority!) for years. But there probably isn't a lot of overlap between people who need gimp to be like professional alternatives and people who can decently code. In our IT study we had four major tracks and the people doing media design were notoriously bad at coding anything beyond HTML, and even that was considered difficult by most of them (the three other tracks were software, embedded software, and business -- the latter also infamous for the same reason).
        dirkgently 8y ago
        That's true, but my comment was more about the HN crowd which is primarily (or exclusively) from programming background. Professionals will always go with a well-marketed and popular option and they don't care about paying 500-1000$ for an image editing program. They don't care (or know) about open source. But I expect better from HN crowd. As for GIMP and its features, well, when Photoshop firdt mentioned about the new Content Aware feature, there was a collective orgasm, but GIMP had that feature (by sheer virtue of the scriptability and flexibility which is inherent in its design) in a script format at least a year or two before that. I don't expect GIMP to win hearts of professionals and their shiny macbooks, but for a casual heavy job, GIMP is more than capable, and expect programmers to appreciate it for what the GIMP project has achieved. But all we get here is "but but Photoshop!"
- nemo 8y ago
  Virtually anyone coming from Photoshop with basic knowledge of the app uses adjustment layers. You can add a layer that applies filters to a mask that leaves the layers beneath untouched. They're incredibly powerful. It's rare I have a project that doesn't use them, and it's among the reasons I wouldn't even consider using GIMP for anything new, despite wishing I could use the app.
CarVac 8y ago
Have you tried PhotoFlow? It's a newer open source photo editor (though not pixel editor) that allows you to compose your own non-destructive processing pipeline from individual operations.
BeetleB 8y ago
>I'm confused how this is not the #1 priority. It's pretty high on the list. Most of the major work in the last decade is to rearchitect the code base to use GEGL. GEGL is a prerequisite to adjustment layers in Gimp. Progress is very slow, but it is moving along.
Nition 8y ago
Especially since Adjustment Layers have been in Photoshop for over 20 years now.
prokoudine 8y ago
> On every new Gimp release I look through the new features and ... no. No adjustment layers. While the roadmap has been stating for years that it's planned for v3.2 :) > I'm confused how this is not the #1 priority. Before 2.10 the top priority was completing the switch to the new image processing backend that makes non-destructive editing possible. For 3.0 the top priority is switching to a newer, actually maintained version of the UI toolkit. For 3.2 the top priority is, at last, the non-destructive editing. It all makes sense.

by TekMol 8y ago

yoz-y 8y ago

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.

mixmastamyk 8y ago
GEGL was mostly done in 2.10.
- Doxin 8y ago
  Porting all the filters and whatnot is still going on however.

lucb1e 8y ago

I've used GIMP for years but I have no idea what you're talking about. Perhaps it's not the #1 priority because you're one of a small percentage of people who need it? While I'm not someone who needs image editing professionally or who makes amazing things with it, I did take my time to learn GIMP properly for my use-cases, and the things I find lacking do not include "non-destructive adjustment layers".

jasonjayr 8y ago
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, and the original image)
- lucb1e 8y ago
  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.
  - dirkgently 8y ago
    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.
    - lucb1e 8y ago
      What I wonder is if they try to work on the features they claim to want so desperately (number one priority!) for years. But there probably isn't a lot of overlap between people who need gimp to be like professional alternatives and people who can decently code. In our IT study we had four major tracks and the people doing media design were notoriously bad at coding anything beyond HTML, and even that was considered difficult by most of them (the three other tracks were software, embedded software, and business -- the latter also infamous for the same reason).
      - dirkgently 8y ago
        That's true, but my comment was more about the HN crowd which is primarily (or exclusively) from programming background. Professionals will always go with a well-marketed and popular option and they don't care about paying 500-1000$ for an image editing program. They don't care (or know) about open source. But I expect better from HN crowd. As for GIMP and its features, well, when Photoshop firdt mentioned about the new Content Aware feature, there was a collective orgasm, but GIMP had that feature (by sheer virtue of the scriptability and flexibility which is inherent in its design) in a script format at least a year or two before that. I don't expect GIMP to win hearts of professionals and their shiny macbooks, but for a casual heavy job, GIMP is more than capable, and expect programmers to appreciate it for what the GIMP project has achieved. But all we get here is "but but Photoshop!"
nemo 8y ago
Virtually anyone coming from Photoshop with basic knowledge of the app uses adjustment layers. You can add a layer that applies filters to a mask that leaves the layers beneath untouched. They're incredibly powerful. It's rare I have a project that doesn't use them, and it's among the reasons I wouldn't even consider using GIMP for anything new, despite wishing I could use the app.

CarVac 8y ago

Have you tried PhotoFlow? It's a newer open source photo editor (though not pixel editor) that allows you to compose your own non-destructive processing pipeline from individual operations.

BeetleB 8y ago

>I'm confused how this is not the #1 priority. It's pretty high on the list. Most of the major work in the last decade is to rearchitect the code base to use GEGL. GEGL is a prerequisite to adjustment layers in Gimp. Progress is very slow, but it is moving along.

Nition 8y ago

Especially since Adjustment Layers have been in Photoshop for over 20 years now.

prokoudine 8y ago

> On every new Gimp release I look through the new features and ... no. No adjustment layers. While the roadmap has been stating for years that it's planned for v3.2 :) > I'm confused how this is not the #1 priority. Before 2.10 the top priority was completing the switch to the new image processing backend that makes non-destructive editing possible. For 3.0 the top priority is switching to a newer, actually maintained version of the UI toolkit. For 3.2 the top priority is, at last, the non-destructive editing. It all makes sense.