3 ms·
I have been a Blender user for over 15 years. While the UI had a learning curve it always made sense to me. With Gimp this is not the case. I sometimes wonder i
by dagw 4y ago
I have been a Blender user for over 15 years. While the UI had a learning curve it always made sense to me. With Gimp this is not the case. I sometimes wonder if the people who built it also use it.
Blender was designed from day 1 by and for working 3D artists that had to deliver real commercial projects. Gimp started as a university student project meant as a platform for playing with different image processing algorithms. Those roots clearly shine through for both projects even today.
- resoluteteeth 4y agoGimp is basically originally a clone of Photoshop 3/4 without most of the subsequent ui improvements. I can't confirm it but I wouldn't be surprised if the floating selection thing was also Photoshop behavior at the time. So the difference isn't really how gimp started, it's just that development was mostly dead for 20 years and nobody put the work into improving the UI. Blender also used to have a bad UI but people worked really hard to change that.
- hitekker 4y agoIt's not just their roots that are different. Blender also once had some weird deficiencies in its UI/UX. As I recall, the developers swallowed their pride and started working alongside with designers and HCI experts. Blender matured from being a cool kid's programming club, into a professional OSS organization. Whereas GIMP seems to shun designers and HCI experts, losing out on the valuable insights that those folks could share.
- taneq 4y agoThe moment Blender's basic navigation and UI clicked for me was when I realised it was vi for polygons. Gimp's interface is a bit janky but after the initial frustration it's always made sense to me... then again I started using it as a replacement for my own image editor which I made as a university student project, so maybe there's a reason for that. :P