9 ms·

GIMP 2.8: Preview

122 points by vgnet 15y ago

lucian1900 15y ago
I'm undecided about save/export in applications that support multiple formats. I think users should certainly be warned if they're making a lossy save, but perhaps they should all be in the same dialog.
- wladimir 15y ago
  The drawback of making it a single dialog box in the user experience is that the "current name" changes when you use "Save as...". So if you do a "Save" next time, you save it as the exported name and format instead of the original one. If, for example, your export format is .png, and your original format is layered, this could bite you. Also you keep flipping between two names. Sometimes an "autoexport on save" feature would be nice. Export it to the derived format as well as save the original file with one keypress.
- mtts 15y ago
  In Gimp, however, if you save to a format that does not support layers when your image has layers, you get a warning. Likewise if you save to a lossy format like JPEG you get a warning. Every time. This works for me. YMMV.
ticks 15y ago
Hopefully these new changes will make Gimp nicer to use. At the moment, the way it handles fonts (or doesn't) is probably my biggest annoyance.
qznc 15y ago
Layer groups! This makes loading those PSDs the graphic designers send around much more bearable. At least I assume that the PSD import can map the PSD Layers to Gimp Layers.
qznc 15y ago
The article is a little bit out of date. The 16bit colors will already be available in the next release (2.10). Michael Natterer and Øyvind Kolås had three-week hackathon and now 90% of the work is done. source: http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ This is also on the official GIMP, but you cannot link to individual news items there. :(
- jacobolus 15y ago
  According to all the docs and pages I see online anywhere, GIMP won’t support 16-bit/channel color until version 3.0, and your source doesn’t really contradict that AFAICT. (None of them give a good estimate what time frame that is.) But in any event, GIMP’s lack of support for real, powerful color management features, high bit depths, CMYK – much less CIELAB or other perceptually relevant color spaces (ideally they should use CIECAM02 or IPT) – etc. make it pretty much useless for any of my own photographic workflows. GEGL doesn’t look likely to overcome the main deficiencies, and so GIMP remains a cute toy more than a power tool. Here’s Graeme Gill from approximately 2 years ago: Graeme Gill: > Rupert Weber wrote: >> (Then again, nobody complained so far and probably >> nobody would ever notice if we did it Right(tm)...) > > You've got a catch 22 situation: If Gimp doesn't > handle color conversions accurately, then noone > interested in accurate color transforms will use > it, hence you will get no complaints about not > doing in Right. So if you want to persuade people > who value accurate and reliable color > transformations to use Gimp, you need to do it > Right, otherwise they will continue to use something > else. (I certainly can't use Gimp in my work, which > revolves around checking color space > transformations.) > > Graeme Gill.
  - sciurus 15y ago
    I think the source comes close to contradicting that without being explicit: 'GIMP 2.10’s core will be 100% ported to GEGL, and all of the legacy pixel fiddling API for plug-ins is going to be deprecated. Once the core is completely ported, it will be a minor effort to simply “switch on” high bit depths and whatever color models we’d like to see. Oh, and already now, instead of removing indexed mode (as originally planned), we accidentally promoted indexed images to first class citizens that can be painted on, and even color corrected, just like any other image. The code doing so doesn’t even notice because GEGL and Babl transparently handle the pixel conversion magic.'
stuaxo 15y ago
This needs to come out soon so I can start the wait for 2.10 :) Seriously though, this is a great step in the right direction, I can't wait till post 2.10 when the geglfication is complete, then some really interesting features should be possible.
- nicubunu 15y ago
  go to http://gimp.org/ http://gimp.org/ to download and install the Release Candidate
possibilistic 15y ago
This is excellent! Not only does single-window mode look much cleaner and more organized (to me), but we'll finally be getting support for high color depth images. That's one of the biggest reasons many photographers have stuck with Photoshop. These are probably two of the largest, most significant changes to Gimp to come about in a long time. I'm surprised the version number wasn't bumped to 3.0. edit: Is the GEGL backend port only partially complete? If so, how long until it's in place? Other tweaks are nice and cosmetic: tooltip progress indicators for transforms, on-image text editing instead of awkwardly doing it in a separate window, etc. Layer groups are another important organizational touch. I'm very much looking forward to this. Great work, Gimp team!
- mattmanser 15y ago
  Straight from the article, note that it explicitly says you won't have the high color depth image support: What's really important, but maybe less user-noticeable, is behind the scene: library work. GIMP 2.8 is an intermediary step in the progress for GEGL integration (GEGL is a graph based image processing framework that will provide the core for GIMP, allowing for much advanced features). This process started with GIMP 2.6, advanced with 2.8, will be finished in 2.10. Expect the real meaty features (like high depth color channels) in the release after 2.10 (is not know if it will be labeles 2.12 or 3.0). For now GEGL is used in some UI elements and some optional filters and tools That also answers most of your questions.
  - angersock 15y ago
    It's funny, because we had this in the mid-90s. And by funny, I mean sad.
- chris_wot 15y ago
  Article says GEGL will be fully implemented in 2.10.
- sciurus 15y ago
  From http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ "At the time this article is written, about 90% of the GIMP application’s core are ported to GEGL, and the only thing really missing are GeglOperations for all layer modes... GIMP 2.10’s core will be 100% ported to GEGL, and all of the legacy pixel fiddling API for plug-ins is going to be deprecated. Once the core is completely ported, it will be a minor effort to simply “switch on” high bit depths and whatever color models we’d like to see... The port lives in the goat-invasion branch in GIT. That branch will become master once GIMP 2.8 is relased, so the first GIMP 2.9 developer release will already contain the port in progress."
sparknlaunch12 15y ago
One thing I don't like about GIMP is the dragging and dropping of selections. Doesn't feel intuitive compared to other packages.
mbylstra 15y ago
Single window mode is definitely the step in the right direction towards what I think GIMP should be doing: ripping off Photoshop wholesale. Perhaps GIMP has some features that are arguably better than Photoshop, but the problem is that a huge number of people are very used to Photoshop's interface. Just about everyone has messed about with Photoshop at some point either professionally or just for fun (be it legally or illegally) and Photoshop's interface (for better or worse) has become second nature. I would actually argue that the lack of a familiar Photoshop alternative is holding back mainstream adoption of Linux. Open Office or Libre Office are good enough replacements for most people (and they have obviously gone for the wholesale rip off tactic) but GIMP just does not suffice - the main thing being the interface, not lack of features. There are really simple things that could be done like making the toolbar the same as photoshop's. I mean it's great that you can resize however you like, but having it unresizable makes it easy to remember the button layout and instinctively grab for a tool. The fact that completely different symbols are used for the same actions does not help. eg: knife is crop in GIMP and slice in photoshop. Once Linux/GIMP has achieved good market share over mac/photoshop then it's time to start thinking about improving the photo/vector publishing paradigm and boy is there much remove for improvement. Adobe has pretty much had the monopoly on 2D graphic design tools for the last couple of decades. With almost no competitors - what incentive is there to truly innovate? I mean compare the sophistication of something like 3D studio max or Maya compared to illustrator. (3D being an area where stiff competition still remains) Why is Photoshop and Illustrator even two completely separate pieces of software? because they can sell two things separately for a combined total price greater than one?
- melling 15y ago
  I'm a developer and I desperately want to learn how to design. I gave up on the GIMP and bought Photoshop simply because there are so many more resources (PSD's, tutorials, blogs, videos, etc). Occasionally I pull up the GIMP, but quite honestly there aren't enough hours in the day. I get the feeling that the GIMP devs wants to be "better" than Photoshop, but the steering wheel, and gas and brake pedals are where they are in a car; it's all about muscle memory. Making it easier for Photoshop users to fire up the GIMP for quick projects will do more to promote the GIMP than being 2x better than Photoshop.
drostie 15y ago
For those who haven't used GIMP, the big fix of single window mode is probably one of the most important steps they're taking. I have occasionally used the fact that I can stack the windows atop each other for hiding purposes, but much more often I'm saying, "dammit, where the hell is my layer bar? Where the hell is my toolbar now? augh! switching to my reference picture in the browser has upset my window order" and so on. On-canvas text editing and cage transforms might be useful; we'll see.
- tbatterii 15y ago
  It's even more painful in a tiling window manager.
  - dkersten 15y ago
    Huh? Since I switched to using tiling window managers, I actually prefer multi-window interfaces for the first time ever because, to me, when tiled they essentially work like single window interfaces, except I have a lot more control over it. (I use a manual-tiling WM, not an automatic-tiling one - I wonder if that makes a difference in this case)
    - tbatterii 15y ago
      maybe. I'm using awesome and I will get funky stuff like the toolbox maximized on occasion. But I'm still new to tiling window managers so maybe it's me.
      - dkersten 15y ago
        awesome is also dynamic tiling, while I use a WM that does manual tiling (though I can make it dynamically tile by window class, application and other parameters - though I have to write scripts to do it - its not automatic out of the box) and maybe this is the difference: I can lay the windows out precisely how I want, while if I understand dynamic tiling WMs correctly, they will try tile the windows for you, which may not work well for multi-window interfaces.
gamache 15y ago
In 1997, me and my beige box PC spent about a day building the GIMP alpha, excited for a Photoshop killer. Now it's 2012, fifteen years later, and we're high-fiving GIMP for the single window interface.
- nicubunu 15y ago
  the single-window interface is overrated, i tried it in one early development releases and returned back to multi-windows
  - libraryatnight 15y ago
    I don't understand the appeal of the multi-windows. I use GIMP at home and I often have multiple images open and find the tool windows disappear on me. It's frustrating. What's overrated about the single window interface and what draws you to multi window mode?
    - cygx 15y ago
      The fact that I can use the window manager of my choice to manage the windows.
    - axiak 15y ago
      I guess the question is whether or not you're using a powerful window manager or not. Most window managers in linux support easy always-on-top and layers, so the multi-window UI really shines.
      - libraryatnight 15y ago
        Ah, this makes sense now :) I haven't tried with a window manager. I'm typically in Windows at home and not always on Linux so I'll have to experiment.
  - skore 15y ago
    I don't even get how people can claim that there is a big difference anyhow - If we were brutally honest here, Photoshop is really only multi-windowed, too - with the main window maximized in the background and carrying the main menu.
lukejduncan 15y ago
OK I haven't read the article yet, but I was pretty disappointed the main picture was large shot of cleavage. What is this, Business Insider?
- AndyKelley 15y ago
  Why do you care? A picture of cleavage is just as valid as a picture of anything else.
  - lukejduncan 15y ago
    It's pretty sexist if you ask me. A general complaint of mine: tech news (and in this case this blog post) include meaningless pictures of woman in a way that is embarrassing to the industry. I'm getting tired of clicking links on HackerNews and LinkedIn today that look like US/People Magazine to any casual observer walking by. We're better than that.
    - watty 15y ago
      The majority of the article is doing touch up work to a woman, which is a very common task. There is nothing sexist about this work, and it's idiotic to claim so.
      - factorizer 15y ago
        that would be a valid reason, if the author of the article actually was working on touch up work of the pictured female. somehow i have the suspicion that no: he chose it on purpose, because, you know: BOOBS!
      - lukejduncan 15y ago
        Why have the main picture a shot of cleavage? He doesn't touch up the cleavage anywhere in the picture. If he did, it'd probably make for a pretty weird demo. The point of the picture was to illustrate the single window mode. It seems like there would be a common sense test where you think: "Is this really how I want to represent myself and this software?"
knewter 15y ago
I'm depressed that so many of the comments here focus on the single window mode, instead of being thrilled about GEGL/Cairo. Those are the killer features that will underpin the GIMP's next few years of awesome features. Also, layer groups ftw
- Avshalom 15y ago
  They've been promising GEGL for so many years now it's hard to be excited that it's almost here.
Kilimanjaro 15y ago
Name it Gimp 3.0 please Just a stupid number but with enough magnetism to attract new users (like me) curious about this 'new point oh' version.
- nicubunu 15y ago
  there are not enough new features to deserve such an increase in the release number. you want numbers inflation like Chrome or Firefox?
- notatoad 15y ago
  this is a transitional release. giving it a big version number bump wouldn't make a lot of sense. and since when do users start using a software just because the version number changed?
  - chc 15y ago
    Since always. Major releases just about always lead to an influx of users. This may be less true on Linux — I don't know — but it is generally true from everything I have ever seen.
angersock 15y ago
We don't really need anything new in this space, though. We need a free/open Photoshop clone. We need a direct, one-to-one monkey copy of Adobe's product. We don't need flights of fancy, we don't need to retrain existing users of image manipulation programs, we don't need to experiment. Adobe already has all the legwork done for us--the answer looks a hell of a lot like Photoshop and its interface. There is zero--ZERO--reason to try to come up with a new interface when there is a perfectly good one in existence that just happens to be poorly distributed. The place where GIMP has screwed up (and Blender and the like along with them) is in not parroting exactly the common tools in the ecosystem. There are weird programs (Wings 3D, Paint.NET, etc.) that are able to significantly depart from conventions, mostly because they have very narrowly-defined functionality (something I don't believe anyone would ever accuse the GIMP of). The GIMP developers should either focus on making a monkey copy (and ignoring everything else until feature/UX parity is achieved), or stop working on the project entirely so they can do something else for a while. Once the monkey copy is done, then innovate. Until then, stop wasting time with things nobody cares about. I used the GIMP as my primary art asset creation tool for several years. It was miserable. The filters and procedural image generation stuff was awesome, but everything else was at best hard to use. Eventually I switched to Photoshop because it was a (comparatively) clean, tight tool with all the bullshit removed.
- billpatrianakos 15y ago
  Yeah, I back you up on this 100%. I never use GIMP on my Linux box because it's not enough like Photoshop. I know, ridiculous sentence, I sound like a blasphemer, my apologies. There's nothing wrong with saying Photoshop has got things right. Sure it's nowhere near open, and incredibly overpriced but that's exactly why I want to love GIMP. I've been wishing for a Photoshop clone minus the bad parts of Photoshop plus some innovations but what I've gotten so far is just falling short. It feels to me like MS Paint on steroids. UI is decent but the functionality kills me in that any time I try to do something like I would in Photoshop like, say adding a simple stroke to a shape or adding a gradient or shadow, in GIMP it doesn't come out looking like its even in the same ballpark as Photoshop no matter how long I spend tweaking knobs and sliders. GIMP may not be for us though. I was under the impression it was a Photoshop alternative but maybe I took that too literally. If I'm the minority then so be it, I'll keep searching for a better fit but I do hope GIMP grants some of my wishes. I open it and I feel like I could use it but then u start using it and it disappoints me.
comice 15y ago
GIMP is some high quality software. I love it. An amazing achievement.

122 points by vgnet 15y ago

lucian1900 15y ago

I'm undecided about save/export in applications that support multiple formats. I think users should certainly be warned if they're making a lossy save, but perhaps they should all be in the same dialog.

wladimir 15y ago
The drawback of making it a single dialog box in the user experience is that the "current name" changes when you use "Save as...". So if you do a "Save" next time, you save it as the exported name and format instead of the original one. If, for example, your export format is .png, and your original format is layered, this could bite you. Also you keep flipping between two names. Sometimes an "autoexport on save" feature would be nice. Export it to the derived format as well as save the original file with one keypress.
mtts 15y ago
In Gimp, however, if you save to a format that does not support layers when your image has layers, you get a warning. Likewise if you save to a lossy format like JPEG you get a warning. Every time. This works for me. YMMV.

ticks 15y ago

Hopefully these new changes will make Gimp nicer to use. At the moment, the way it handles fonts (or doesn't) is probably my biggest annoyance.

qznc 15y ago

Layer groups! This makes loading those PSDs the graphic designers send around much more bearable. At least I assume that the PSD import can map the PSD Layers to Gimp Layers.

qznc 15y ago

The article is a little bit out of date. The 16bit colors will already be available in the next release (2.10). Michael Natterer and Øyvind Kolås had three-week hackathon and now 90% of the work is done. source: http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ This is also on the official GIMP, but you cannot link to individual news items there. :(

jacobolus 15y ago
According to all the docs and pages I see online anywhere, GIMP won’t support 16-bit/channel color until version 3.0, and your source doesn’t really contradict that AFAICT. (None of them give a good estimate what time frame that is.) But in any event, GIMP’s lack of support for real, powerful color management features, high bit depths, CMYK – much less CIELAB or other perceptually relevant color spaces (ideally they should use CIECAM02 or IPT) – etc. make it pretty much useless for any of my own photographic workflows. GEGL doesn’t look likely to overcome the main deficiencies, and so GIMP remains a cute toy more than a power tool. Here’s Graeme Gill from approximately 2 years ago: Graeme Gill: > Rupert Weber wrote: >> (Then again, nobody complained so far and probably >> nobody would ever notice if we did it Right(tm)...) > > You've got a catch 22 situation: If Gimp doesn't > handle color conversions accurately, then noone > interested in accurate color transforms will use > it, hence you will get no complaints about not > doing in Right. So if you want to persuade people > who value accurate and reliable color > transformations to use Gimp, you need to do it > Right, otherwise they will continue to use something > else. (I certainly can't use Gimp in my work, which > revolves around checking color space > transformations.) > > Graeme Gill.
- sciurus 15y ago
  I think the source comes close to contradicting that without being explicit: 'GIMP 2.10’s core will be 100% ported to GEGL, and all of the legacy pixel fiddling API for plug-ins is going to be deprecated. Once the core is completely ported, it will be a minor effort to simply “switch on” high bit depths and whatever color models we’d like to see. Oh, and already now, instead of removing indexed mode (as originally planned), we accidentally promoted indexed images to first class citizens that can be painted on, and even color corrected, just like any other image. The code doing so doesn’t even notice because GEGL and Babl transparently handle the pixel conversion magic.'

stuaxo 15y ago

This needs to come out soon so I can start the wait for 2.10 :) Seriously though, this is a great step in the right direction, I can't wait till post 2.10 when the geglfication is complete, then some really interesting features should be possible.

nicubunu 15y ago
go to http://gimp.org/ http://gimp.org/ to download and install the Release Candidate

possibilistic 15y ago

This is excellent! Not only does single-window mode look much cleaner and more organized (to me), but we'll finally be getting support for high color depth images. That's one of the biggest reasons many photographers have stuck with Photoshop. These are probably two of the largest, most significant changes to Gimp to come about in a long time. I'm surprised the version number wasn't bumped to 3.0. edit: Is the GEGL backend port only partially complete? If so, how long until it's in place? Other tweaks are nice and cosmetic: tooltip progress indicators for transforms, on-image text editing instead of awkwardly doing it in a separate window, etc. Layer groups are another important organizational touch. I'm very much looking forward to this. Great work, Gimp team!

mattmanser 15y ago
Straight from the article, note that it explicitly says you won't have the high color depth image support: What's really important, but maybe less user-noticeable, is behind the scene: library work. GIMP 2.8 is an intermediary step in the progress for GEGL integration (GEGL is a graph based image processing framework that will provide the core for GIMP, allowing for much advanced features). This process started with GIMP 2.6, advanced with 2.8, will be finished in 2.10. Expect the real meaty features (like high depth color channels) in the release after 2.10 (is not know if it will be labeles 2.12 or 3.0). For now GEGL is used in some UI elements and some optional filters and tools That also answers most of your questions.
- angersock 15y ago
  It's funny, because we had this in the mid-90s. And by funny, I mean sad.
chris_wot 15y ago
Article says GEGL will be fully implemented in 2.10.
sciurus 15y ago
From http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ http://gimpfoo.de/2012/04/17/goat-invasion-in-gimp/ "At the time this article is written, about 90% of the GIMP application’s core are ported to GEGL, and the only thing really missing are GeglOperations for all layer modes... GIMP 2.10’s core will be 100% ported to GEGL, and all of the legacy pixel fiddling API for plug-ins is going to be deprecated. Once the core is completely ported, it will be a minor effort to simply “switch on” high bit depths and whatever color models we’d like to see... The port lives in the goat-invasion branch in GIT. That branch will become master once GIMP 2.8 is relased, so the first GIMP 2.9 developer release will already contain the port in progress."

sparknlaunch12 15y ago

One thing I don't like about GIMP is the dragging and dropping of selections. Doesn't feel intuitive compared to other packages.

mbylstra 15y ago

Single window mode is definitely the step in the right direction towards what I think GIMP should be doing: ripping off Photoshop wholesale. Perhaps GIMP has some features that are arguably better than Photoshop, but the problem is that a huge number of people are very used to Photoshop's interface. Just about everyone has messed about with Photoshop at some point either professionally or just for fun (be it legally or illegally) and Photoshop's interface (for better or worse) has become second nature. I would actually argue that the lack of a familiar Photoshop alternative is holding back mainstream adoption of Linux. Open Office or Libre Office are good enough replacements for most people (and they have obviously gone for the wholesale rip off tactic) but GIMP just does not suffice - the main thing being the interface, not lack of features. There are really simple things that could be done like making the toolbar the same as photoshop's. I mean it's great that you can resize however you like, but having it unresizable makes it easy to remember the button layout and instinctively grab for a tool. The fact that completely different symbols are used for the same actions does not help. eg: knife is crop in GIMP and slice in photoshop. Once Linux/GIMP has achieved good market share over mac/photoshop then it's time to start thinking about improving the photo/vector publishing paradigm and boy is there much remove for improvement. Adobe has pretty much had the monopoly on 2D graphic design tools for the last couple of decades. With almost no competitors - what incentive is there to truly innovate? I mean compare the sophistication of something like 3D studio max or Maya compared to illustrator. (3D being an area where stiff competition still remains) Why is Photoshop and Illustrator even two completely separate pieces of software? because they can sell two things separately for a combined total price greater than one?

melling 15y ago
I'm a developer and I desperately want to learn how to design. I gave up on the GIMP and bought Photoshop simply because there are so many more resources (PSD's, tutorials, blogs, videos, etc). Occasionally I pull up the GIMP, but quite honestly there aren't enough hours in the day. I get the feeling that the GIMP devs wants to be "better" than Photoshop, but the steering wheel, and gas and brake pedals are where they are in a car; it's all about muscle memory. Making it easier for Photoshop users to fire up the GIMP for quick projects will do more to promote the GIMP than being 2x better than Photoshop.

drostie 15y ago

For those who haven't used GIMP, the big fix of single window mode is probably one of the most important steps they're taking. I have occasionally used the fact that I can stack the windows atop each other for hiding purposes, but much more often I'm saying, "dammit, where the hell is my layer bar? Where the hell is my toolbar now? augh! switching to my reference picture in the browser has upset my window order" and so on. On-canvas text editing and cage transforms might be useful; we'll see.

tbatterii 15y ago
It's even more painful in a tiling window manager.
- dkersten 15y ago
  Huh? Since I switched to using tiling window managers, I actually prefer multi-window interfaces for the first time ever because, to me, when tiled they essentially work like single window interfaces, except I have a lot more control over it. (I use a manual-tiling WM, not an automatic-tiling one - I wonder if that makes a difference in this case)
  - tbatterii 15y ago
    maybe. I'm using awesome and I will get funky stuff like the toolbox maximized on occasion. But I'm still new to tiling window managers so maybe it's me.
    - dkersten 15y ago
      awesome is also dynamic tiling, while I use a WM that does manual tiling (though I can make it dynamically tile by window class, application and other parameters - though I have to write scripts to do it - its not automatic out of the box) and maybe this is the difference: I can lay the windows out precisely how I want, while if I understand dynamic tiling WMs correctly, they will try tile the windows for you, which may not work well for multi-window interfaces.

gamache 15y ago

In 1997, me and my beige box PC spent about a day building the GIMP alpha, excited for a Photoshop killer. Now it's 2012, fifteen years later, and we're high-fiving GIMP for the single window interface.

nicubunu 15y ago
the single-window interface is overrated, i tried it in one early development releases and returned back to multi-windows
- libraryatnight 15y ago
  I don't understand the appeal of the multi-windows. I use GIMP at home and I often have multiple images open and find the tool windows disappear on me. It's frustrating. What's overrated about the single window interface and what draws you to multi window mode?
  - cygx 15y ago
    The fact that I can use the window manager of my choice to manage the windows.
  - axiak 15y ago
    I guess the question is whether or not you're using a powerful window manager or not. Most window managers in linux support easy always-on-top and layers, so the multi-window UI really shines.
    - libraryatnight 15y ago
      Ah, this makes sense now :) I haven't tried with a window manager. I'm typically in Windows at home and not always on Linux so I'll have to experiment.
- skore 15y ago
  I don't even get how people can claim that there is a big difference anyhow - If we were brutally honest here, Photoshop is really only multi-windowed, too - with the main window maximized in the background and carrying the main menu.

lukejduncan 15y ago

OK I haven't read the article yet, but I was pretty disappointed the main picture was large shot of cleavage. What is this, Business Insider?

AndyKelley 15y ago
Why do you care? A picture of cleavage is just as valid as a picture of anything else.
- lukejduncan 15y ago
  It's pretty sexist if you ask me. A general complaint of mine: tech news (and in this case this blog post) include meaningless pictures of woman in a way that is embarrassing to the industry. I'm getting tired of clicking links on HackerNews and LinkedIn today that look like US/People Magazine to any casual observer walking by. We're better than that.
  - watty 15y ago
    The majority of the article is doing touch up work to a woman, which is a very common task. There is nothing sexist about this work, and it's idiotic to claim so.
    - factorizer 15y ago
      that would be a valid reason, if the author of the article actually was working on touch up work of the pictured female. somehow i have the suspicion that no: he chose it on purpose, because, you know: BOOBS!
    - lukejduncan 15y ago
      Why have the main picture a shot of cleavage? He doesn't touch up the cleavage anywhere in the picture. If he did, it'd probably make for a pretty weird demo. The point of the picture was to illustrate the single window mode. It seems like there would be a common sense test where you think: "Is this really how I want to represent myself and this software?"

knewter 15y ago

I'm depressed that so many of the comments here focus on the single window mode, instead of being thrilled about GEGL/Cairo. Those are the killer features that will underpin the GIMP's next few years of awesome features. Also, layer groups ftw

Avshalom 15y ago
They've been promising GEGL for so many years now it's hard to be excited that it's almost here.

Kilimanjaro 15y ago

Name it Gimp 3.0 please Just a stupid number but with enough magnetism to attract new users (like me) curious about this 'new point oh' version.

nicubunu 15y ago
there are not enough new features to deserve such an increase in the release number. you want numbers inflation like Chrome or Firefox?
notatoad 15y ago
this is a transitional release. giving it a big version number bump wouldn't make a lot of sense. and since when do users start using a software just because the version number changed?
- chc 15y ago
  Since always. Major releases just about always lead to an influx of users. This may be less true on Linux — I don't know — but it is generally true from everything I have ever seen.

angersock 15y ago

We don't really need anything new in this space, though. We need a free/open Photoshop clone. We need a direct, one-to-one monkey copy of Adobe's product. We don't need flights of fancy, we don't need to retrain existing users of image manipulation programs, we don't need to experiment. Adobe already has all the legwork done for us--the answer looks a hell of a lot like Photoshop and its interface. There is zero--ZERO--reason to try to come up with a new interface when there is a perfectly good one in existence that just happens to be poorly distributed. The place where GIMP has screwed up (and Blender and the like along with them) is in not parroting exactly the common tools in the ecosystem. There are weird programs (Wings 3D, Paint.NET, etc.) that are able to significantly depart from conventions, mostly because they have very narrowly-defined functionality (something I don't believe anyone would ever accuse the GIMP of). The GIMP developers should either focus on making a monkey copy (and ignoring everything else until feature/UX parity is achieved), or stop working on the project entirely so they can do something else for a while. Once the monkey copy is done, then innovate. Until then, stop wasting time with things nobody cares about. I used the GIMP as my primary art asset creation tool for several years. It was miserable. The filters and procedural image generation stuff was awesome, but everything else was at best hard to use. Eventually I switched to Photoshop because it was a (comparatively) clean, tight tool with all the bullshit removed.

billpatrianakos 15y ago
Yeah, I back you up on this 100%. I never use GIMP on my Linux box because it's not enough like Photoshop. I know, ridiculous sentence, I sound like a blasphemer, my apologies. There's nothing wrong with saying Photoshop has got things right. Sure it's nowhere near open, and incredibly overpriced but that's exactly why I want to love GIMP. I've been wishing for a Photoshop clone minus the bad parts of Photoshop plus some innovations but what I've gotten so far is just falling short. It feels to me like MS Paint on steroids. UI is decent but the functionality kills me in that any time I try to do something like I would in Photoshop like, say adding a simple stroke to a shape or adding a gradient or shadow, in GIMP it doesn't come out looking like its even in the same ballpark as Photoshop no matter how long I spend tweaking knobs and sliders. GIMP may not be for us though. I was under the impression it was a Photoshop alternative but maybe I took that too literally. If I'm the minority then so be it, I'll keep searching for a better fit but I do hope GIMP grants some of my wishes. I open it and I feel like I could use it but then u start using it and it disappoints me.

comice 15y ago

GIMP is some high quality software. I love it. An amazing achievement.