5 ms·

This? http://bit.ly/1Yl9Su http://bit.ly/1Yl9Su This looks amazing? Really? It looks fine... but maybe the linux dudes have standards lowered a bit?

by jpcx01 17y ago

ars 17y ago
No short urls here please - even for very long ones. The url is: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FJH0hYZmVtc/SsuTeVas_WI/AAAAAAAADlc/VkiIOWlsssM/s1600-h/gimp-single-window-mode-in-progress.png http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FJH0hYZmVtc/SsuTeVas_WI/AAAAAAAADl...
- nailer 17y ago
  Comment redacted, thought you were referring to the article itself, not your parent comment...
hughprime 17y ago
I assume "it looks AMAZING" is perfectly within the usual editorial standards of "omgbuntu", but wouldn't mind seeing a different headline here. How about "it looks REASONABLY GOOD" or "it looks ABOUT LIKE YOU MIGHT EXPECT"?
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  How about "it looks like a mess" or "it looks like every shareware image editor since the days of Windows 95" or "it looks like you crammed as many controls as you could fit on screen using a cross-platform windowing toolkit"? I can't say any of that, it's rude - but it's what I'm thinking. Look at the right hand side - count the scrollbars, the dropdowns, the counters. What's that hideous layer control thing that's like a treeview/gridview with nested scrollbars sized to suggest it should be huge, crammed into a tiny little space? Grim.
  - nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
    Do note that all that UI is crammed into a 978×722 pixel window; I would imagine it works far better on a decently sized 1280x1024 or larger screen. I bet you'd be pretty hard-pressed to get Photoshop or such to work well in that small of a space too...
    - zokier 17y ago
      http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6628/smallphotoshop.png http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6628/smallphotoshop.png Yes, its 100px wider, but still, imho Photoshop makes a lot better use of precious screen space. Compare the buttons under layer palettes. GIMP has 32px icons, while Photoshop has over 10px smaller ones. Or the slider, in Photoshop under "Navigator" and in GIMP in the Layers palette. Actually just compare Layers palettes in each. GIMP uses lots of superfluous labels and huge font size compared to Photoshop In my screenshot Photoshop also has 2 more palettes on screen. Photoshops UI is also quite flexible, allowing to move and resize palettes freely, dock and undock, and group palettes to tab-groups. And layouts can be saved and then selected with just few mouse clicks. This allows it to scale across monitor size and count relatively easily. edit: Sorry for inflammatory Photoshop vs. GIMP post
    - utexaspunk 17y ago
      Photoshop (at least CS3, anyway) won't even install on a computer with a resolution less than 1024x768. Found that out when I tried to put it on my eee.
- NathanKP 17y ago
  Sadly this is perhaps a measure of how desperate us GIMP users are. I'm just happy that GIMP is all going to be in one window. Its amazing that they finally decided to leave the old standard interface. But relief and anticipation aside I have to agree with you that as far as aesthetics and design it is rather mediocre.
  - LogicHoleFlaw 17y ago
    At the very least it is a start. Now that the maintainers are allowing the single-window mode to be created the onward march of open-source progress will keep improving it. It may not approach the elegance that Apple's designers deliver but we can sure as hell beat Adobe. Edit: Did all of my downvote arrows disappear? I don't want to downvote anyone in particular here but that seems odd.
kentosi 17y ago
Sad but true... I actually fought with the linux UI for ages to make it look visually appealing. Invariably I always ended up using MS Window fonts, and Mac-style UI. If you look closely at the screenshot you'll notice that it'll only take a few minor adjustments to make it actually look appealing: - Appropriate fonts (rather than those overly rounded ones) - Slimming down of grotesquely large UI text boxes. - Slimming down of grotesquely large dropdown controls. - NOT using rounded corners everywhere. You'd be amazed how radically the UI can be improved from just these minor changes. Ironic that they chose this screenshot, given that GIMP is a project mainly concerned with graphics and visuals.
- zokier 17y ago
  Looks like it uses native widgets and fonts, as it should (GTK stands for GIMP ToolKit after all). If it looks bad, GTK (or its theme) is to blame, not GIMP itself. BUT I think you are correct, some UI elements, especially in the palettes are too large.
jan_g 17y ago
Granted, it won't win beauty pageant, but why do any of us use tools like gimp ? To get stuff done. Multiple windows were annoying (especially in combination with multiple desktops :-)), but other than that gimp qualifies as a good tool.

This? http://bit.ly/1Yl9Su http://bit.ly/1Yl9Su This looks amazing? Really? It looks fine... but maybe the linux dudes have standards lowered a bit?

by jpcx01 17y ago

This? http://bit.ly/1Yl9Su http://bit.ly/1Yl9Su This looks amazing? Really? It looks fine... but maybe the linux dudes have standards lowered a bit?

ars 17y ago

No short urls here please - even for very long ones. The url is: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FJH0hYZmVtc/SsuTeVas_WI/AAAAAAAADlc/VkiIOWlsssM/s1600-h/gimp-single-window-mode-in-progress.png http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FJH0hYZmVtc/SsuTeVas_WI/AAAAAAAADl...

nailer 17y ago
Comment redacted, thought you were referring to the article itself, not your parent comment...

hughprime 17y ago

I assume "it looks AMAZING" is perfectly within the usual editorial standards of "omgbuntu", but wouldn't mind seeing a different headline here. How about "it looks REASONABLY GOOD" or "it looks ABOUT LIKE YOU MIGHT EXPECT"?

jodrellblank 17y ago
How about "it looks like a mess" or "it looks like every shareware image editor since the days of Windows 95" or "it looks like you crammed as many controls as you could fit on screen using a cross-platform windowing toolkit"? I can't say any of that, it's rude - but it's what I'm thinking. Look at the right hand side - count the scrollbars, the dropdowns, the counters. What's that hideous layer control thing that's like a treeview/gridview with nested scrollbars sized to suggest it should be huge, crammed into a tiny little space? Grim.
- nuclear_eclipse 17y ago
  Do note that all that UI is crammed into a 978×722 pixel window; I would imagine it works far better on a decently sized 1280x1024 or larger screen. I bet you'd be pretty hard-pressed to get Photoshop or such to work well in that small of a space too...
  - zokier 17y ago
    http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6628/smallphotoshop.png http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6628/smallphotoshop.png Yes, its 100px wider, but still, imho Photoshop makes a lot better use of precious screen space. Compare the buttons under layer palettes. GIMP has 32px icons, while Photoshop has over 10px smaller ones. Or the slider, in Photoshop under "Navigator" and in GIMP in the Layers palette. Actually just compare Layers palettes in each. GIMP uses lots of superfluous labels and huge font size compared to Photoshop In my screenshot Photoshop also has 2 more palettes on screen. Photoshops UI is also quite flexible, allowing to move and resize palettes freely, dock and undock, and group palettes to tab-groups. And layouts can be saved and then selected with just few mouse clicks. This allows it to scale across monitor size and count relatively easily. edit: Sorry for inflammatory Photoshop vs. GIMP post
  - utexaspunk 17y ago
    Photoshop (at least CS3, anyway) won't even install on a computer with a resolution less than 1024x768. Found that out when I tried to put it on my eee.
NathanKP 17y ago
Sadly this is perhaps a measure of how desperate us GIMP users are. I'm just happy that GIMP is all going to be in one window. Its amazing that they finally decided to leave the old standard interface. But relief and anticipation aside I have to agree with you that as far as aesthetics and design it is rather mediocre.
- LogicHoleFlaw 17y ago
  At the very least it is a start. Now that the maintainers are allowing the single-window mode to be created the onward march of open-source progress will keep improving it. It may not approach the elegance that Apple's designers deliver but we can sure as hell beat Adobe. Edit: Did all of my downvote arrows disappear? I don't want to downvote anyone in particular here but that seems odd.

kentosi 17y ago

Sad but true... I actually fought with the linux UI for ages to make it look visually appealing. Invariably I always ended up using MS Window fonts, and Mac-style UI. If you look closely at the screenshot you'll notice that it'll only take a few minor adjustments to make it actually look appealing: - Appropriate fonts (rather than those overly rounded ones) - Slimming down of grotesquely large UI text boxes. - Slimming down of grotesquely large dropdown controls. - NOT using rounded corners everywhere. You'd be amazed how radically the UI can be improved from just these minor changes. Ironic that they chose this screenshot, given that GIMP is a project mainly concerned with graphics and visuals.

zokier 17y ago
Looks like it uses native widgets and fonts, as it should (GTK stands for GIMP ToolKit after all). If it looks bad, GTK (or its theme) is to blame, not GIMP itself. BUT I think you are correct, some UI elements, especially in the palettes are too large.

jan_g 17y ago

Granted, it won't win beauty pageant, but why do any of us use tools like gimp ? To get stuff done. Multiple windows were annoying (especially in combination with multiple desktops :-)), but other than that gimp qualifies as a good tool.