digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at news.softpedia.com

First Look: The GIMP 2.5.0

news.softpedia.com — The GIMP team announced today the first release from the 2.5 development series. It is true that this version is unstable, but a little bird told me to give it a try and see what's it capable of. First of all, let me tell you that its interface is quite redesigned and I think that some users will have problems adjusting with it..

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • staraligned, on 04/14/2008, -25/+2Awesome! Thx
  • Anonymous3, on 04/14/2008, -1/+41"This is the unstable development branch of GIMP. Here we are working
    towards the next stable release, which will be GIMP 2.6."
    Guess that's fair warning then.

    And if you want to know why gimp is using gegl as its backbone:
    "With GEGL you chain together image processing operations represented by nodes into a graph. GEGL provides such operations for loading and storing images, adjusting colors, filtering images in different ways, translating images etc

    GEGLs programmer/user interface is a Directed Acyclic Graph of nodes. The DAG expresses a processing chain of operations. A DAG, or any node in it, expresses a composited and processed image. It is possible to request rectangular regions in a wide range of pixel formats from any node."
    http://gegl.org/

    And if you can be bothered to read more notes:
    http://gimp.org/release-notes/gimp-2.5.html
    http://developer.gimp.org/NEWS
  • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -8/+98Gimp is really an amazing editor as it is. I've been using it for photo editing, and some of the tools have really matured and become easier to use in the past year or so.

    Changes like GEGL (this is the first I've heard of it) really open up some new potential for the Gimp. Can't wait to see what happens here.

    As a hobbyist photographer, Gimp has been all I've needed for image editing. Besides, I can't justify dumping vast sums of money on Photoshop when I only have a $200 camera. Most of the time, all a photo 'needs' are some curves adjustment, rotating, cropping -- all of which the Gimp can do. I've experimented with HDR techniques (merging/masking multiple images) and have gotten great results in Gimp, but I try to do it tastefully, such that you can't tell if it's HDR or not. I get sick of some of the gaudy images that show up.

    Anyways, here's my flickr -- any and all editing was done with the Gimp: http://www.flickr.com/photos/15357373@N03/ [/shameless self-promotion] ;)

    But back on topic, I'm definitely going to check out 2.5.0 -- even if I have to grab the sources myself. :)
    • frsrblch, on 04/14/2008, -0/+11Very nice!
    • passedoutghost, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8Do you have a higher res shot of this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/15357373@N03/20341581 ... Say 1280 by 1024?
      • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+10Yup. The full size version would be available on flickr if I had a pro account... oh well.

        Because I don't have a pro account yet, I've uploaded it to ImageShack and link is in the description:
        http://www.flickr.com/photos/15357373@N03/20341581 ...

        All I ask is that if you share the photo, link to the flickr page.

        It's 2400x1804. Feel free to scale and crop as you see fit -- for personal use, of course. :)
        • passedoutghost, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8Naturally. It's my new desktop wallpaper and nothing else. Thank you very much.
        • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1:D

          This thread made my day. Thanks all.
      • jsaya, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2I agree this is a nice photo, but is that a plastic bag to the right in the water? If so, I find it sad that even simple moments in nature cannot escape what humans are doing to this earth.
        • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I think it may be. I didn't notice it when I was shooting... but it's an eye-sore on that photo... such a beautiful area and a beautiful bird.

          If anyone cares, I took those photos while I was visiting Bethel College (Mishawaka, Indiana) last fall. The campus is covered in oak trees and has a few small ponds, where I came across this amazing hawk.
    • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -20/+2Amazon.com has Adobe Photoshop Elements for $55
      • mossblaser, on 04/14/2008, -0/+12GIMP > Potoshop Elements
        Photoshop Elements is Picasa with a levels tool...
        • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -4/+0thtroyer was complaining about the "vast sums of money" he would need to spend on Photoshop. Obviously that isn't the case.
        • nmnnotmyname, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1But Elements is horrible! You can't do ***** with elements. You miss the point, for anything decent you need a serious ***** of money.
      • latova, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4The internet has GIMP for free (legally speaking)
    • mif86, on 04/14/2008, -7/+24Photoshop isn't ...free?
    • rodrigo74, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4You got some pretty good shots there, congratulations.
      I am just starting on digital photography and after getting depressed with the price of Photoshop I decided to give Gimp a shot; I've found a really cool video podcast teaching some stuff you can do with it (www.meetthegimp.org) and so far I am quite impressed with what I've seen.
      • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Thanks. :D

        Yeah, GIMP is no photoshop replacement, but it is an amazingly capable program in its own right.

        Just a word of advice for starting out: forget plugins, effects, etc.

        Learn how to use the curves tool -- you can control almost every aspect of the color and contrast with it (and remember, small adjustments go a long way). The levels tool is another great tool to learn and much simpler to use than curves. Good use of one (or both) of those tools can do wonders.

        I've never heard of meetthegimp. I'll check that out as well, since I'm always up for learning about new editing techniques. Thanks. :)
  • ptFoe, on 04/14/2008, -4/+23does this support CMYK
    • minigamer1896, on 04/14/2008, -7/+19Courtesy of Wikipedia:
      "Color support
      GIMP also has a palette with RGB, HSV, color wheel, CMYK, and mixing modes..."
      • trogdoor, on 04/14/2008, -0/+34"... Note that 'CMYK' colors are immediately translated into RGB when used; GIMP does not have any built-in support for CMYK mixtures that cannot be represented in RGB, such as rich blacks, though they can be simulated to a limited extent with third-party add-ons"

        None the less, GEGL will ( does ) support more color modes.
    • ArthurSucks, on 04/14/2008, -1/+30That's what's going to be so hot about GEGL. It WILL support more color modes.
    • badassninja, on 04/14/2008, -33/+2Does it support your ass?
      • theaceoffire, on 04/14/2008, -1/+15Not with your head shoved up it.
    • xaogypsie, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8And 16bit images. That's critical for what I do.

      • filsinger, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Agreed. I moved away from GIMP a couple years ago in favor of Photoshop because GIMP didn't have 16bit support. I've been impressed with some of the changes GIMP has made over the past little while, I cant wait to get home and try it out (it won't be replacing Photoshop in my work-flow though)
    • mooninite, on 04/14/2008, -17/+12Gimp has had CMYK support since 2.4. Yet another "Linux myth" that can't seem to go away.
      • Yarnage, on 04/14/2008, -0/+12Actually, it "fakes" CMYK support. It internally converts all CMYK colors to RGB so it doesn't support it to the extent that Photoshop does.
        • Gavagai80, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4Krita, however, has had true CMYK support for ages.
      • epgui, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2i'd like to see you try to import a CMYK pdf file someone else just sent you (with GIMP 2.4)!
    • mossblaser, on 04/14/2008, -8/+5If you are one of the 99% of digg users who bring this up each time there is a GIMP article around then you probably wouldn't even know what to do with CYMK support. If you are one of the 1% of users who do then I apologize, there is a plugin to do most of the stuff you'll want but really if you're that serious about photography then the cost of photoshop is immaterial.
      • hackiavelli, on 04/14/2008, -1/+7CMYK isn't about photography. It's about professional printing and native support really is THAT important for those of us who use it.
    • LingNoi, on 04/14/2008, -15/+7Go away CMYK troll. It's been there for over a year now.
    • shmatt, on 04/14/2008, -5/+11***** GIMP zealots. You know, people need NATIVE CMYK in the graphics industry. If you don't know what that means, then STFU. You are doing a disservice to all when you confuse things. Converting to CMYK is not the same as editing in the colorspace. You need accurate colors and the more you trust 'simulated' color, the more likely you are to get a nasty surprise when you see your final proofs (if you bother to get them). In the print graphics world, innacurate color can cost money and client satisfaction.
      I think adobe pretty much sucks but Pshop still is the only game in town.. unfortunately
      • yenster, on 04/14/2008, -5/+3I'm sorry, but this is so wrong. If you do your editing on an any type of computer monitor, then what you are trying to edit is an RGB simulation of a CMYK color space. No LCD/CRT device can display true CMYK. It's physically incapable of doing that.
        • solid12345, on 04/14/2008, -1/+5Of course a monitor can never be 100% accurate, light is not the same as ink, but the matter of the fact is you want your color profile to be as accurate as can be on a monitor.
    • stoanhart, on 04/14/2008, -0/+7Probably not yet - this is very early GEGL integration stuff, which is a massive effort (I've lurked on the dev mailing lists). Once GEGL is fully integrated it will support all color spaces and up to 32 bit floating point color depth, all with non-destructive editing.
  • sloppychris, on 04/14/2008, -1/+16I can't figure out what's different about the text tool, and the release notes don't mention it.
    • TeacherOfHeroes, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1The alignment options (in the bottom part of the main tool window) seem much different than I recall from earlier versions of the GIMP.
  • keyo, on 04/14/2008, -18/+32So still no parent window...
    • minigamer1896, on 04/14/2008, -5/+19Try GIMPShop.
      http://www.gimpshop.com/
      • volve, on 04/14/2008, -0/+9I would love to switch to GIMPShop, except it's still on 2.2 from May 2006 :( I've been following it since it came out, and it's only had very minor updates with basically nothing this year or last.

        And jesus christ, holy ad overload on gimpshop.com :/
    • gerryk, on 04/14/2008, -8/+29Ya know... neither does Photoshop on OS X, so your point is?
      • estvir, on 04/14/2008, -3/+25A large number of people use it on Windows and even on OS X at least the multiple windows are manageable and the multiple entries in the bottom panel on Gnome is annoying.
        • mossblaser, on 04/14/2008, -1/+8Tell gimp to set the windowing hint to toolbox then they are managed as toolboxes and don't show up in your task bar, on the down side they seem to ignore multiple desktops...
      • MatB, on 04/14/2008, -0/+11Usability?
      • gadgetuk, on 04/14/2008, -1/+10Umm... yes it does. The windows might float free on PS for OS X but there aren't a bunch of taskbar/dock icons clogging everything up.
        • mossblaser, on 04/14/2008, -2/+4Tell gimp to set the windowing hint to toolbox then they are managed as toolboxes and don't show up in your task bar, on the down side they seem to ignore multiple desktops...
    • neko, on 04/14/2008, -11/+33Maybe I don't want a parent window? Maybe the whole MDI thing with a huge grey background window is just an ugly hack around Windows' useless window manager?
      • keyo, on 04/14/2008, -3/+27Yup, it is. But better than having 10 tasks on your bar.
        • niviq, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4Well, unlike Window's useless window manager, most window managers running on Linux are advanced enough to set up window rules. Just make the windows with roles "gimp-toolbox" and "gimp-dock" skip the taskbar, and it works a bit like Photoshop on Mac OS X. You can, I'm sure, make the toolboxes disappear when GIMP looses focus, too.
        • geoken, on 04/14/2008, -1/+1Does your skip taskbar method make them all minimize together? When I drag the main window will the toolbox drag as well? If I resize the main window will the toolbox also shrink?
        • nmnnotmyname, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1In GIMP, the main window IS the toolbox window..
          ...
          ...
          Dumbass.
      • groverblue, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6why can't there be a choice in preferences?
    • Theli, on 04/14/2008, -0/+12I think I read somewhere that, in the future, GIMP will allow you to dock the toolbox to the document window. Not sure if it's still planned for 2.6, but I sure hope so.
    • siroki, on 04/14/2008, -0/+24"GIMP now always keeps an image window open and the default configuration treats the toolbox and docks as utility windows."
      That means the "parent" window will be the document window itself, and when you activate it, the toolbox and dock windows will pop up as well.
      • nailer, on 04/14/2008, -1/+9I don't know why you were moderated down, you're 100% correct- the window with the image is now the main window, and remains open at all times. The toolbox is now just the toolbox.
  • shadoweva09, on 04/14/2008, -40/+7gimp does not equal replacement for photoshop, ever. Especially when the "equivalent" features, if there are any, have to be found through directions that read more like a treasure map to get through the user interface. And yes they can amazingly drop the ball on single window every damn time.
    • minigamer1896, on 04/14/2008, -3/+15GIMP≠Photoshop
      Also, Linux≠Windows≠MacOSX
    • Aitese, on 04/14/2008, -4/+33No one mentioned Photoshop until you brought it up. This is about GIMP. You like Photoshop, you buy it, you use it. No problem. Stop being a clown.
    • Teh1337Pirate, on 04/14/2008, -1/+5Maybe you're just not bright enough to figure out how to use GIMP...
    • nmnnotmyname, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1I would digg you down, but you have -34 diggs as of now. :P
  • 10GunSalute, on 04/14/2008, -33/+15Awesome, the interface still is a piece of *****.
    • passedoutghost, on 04/14/2008, -6/+6Don't like it don't use it. I personally have gotten used to it, and never having used Photoshop or any other image editing program besides Paint, the interface is pretty clear.
    • Hangly, on 04/14/2008, -1/+13I like the Gimp, but the interface could still be better.
    • Amiga500, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2He's absolutely right. Look at the screen shot of the filter dialog that opens so large in full screen that you can't read all the choices. A little organization goes a long way.
      • nmnnotmyname, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1A little ignorance goes a long way too : You do realize this is a development version? the GUI is undeveloped compared to their plans. It's quite obvious IMHO.

        Plus the old interface was alright just before this major change. Ever used stable GIMP before?

        (Why does different always seem to equal worse with ignorant people?)
  • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -10/+71The interface is excellent if you know how to use virtual desktops or use a good window manager. Besides, The GIMP was designed to be dual monitor friendly and X11 friendly, Photoshop is not. This is a simple case of people used to Windows bitching because they are used to using a window manager that sucks ass at window management. They want programs themselves to do the job of the window manager which is silly and backwards.
    • shadoweva09, on 04/14/2008, -19/+5The point is that you're not supposed to leave UI design up to chance on whether the client OS supports certain features, or whether the user will work around it for you. That's just ridiculous.

      Silly and backwards? the user is supposed to make up for a lack in functionality because the programmers are lazy? Adobe certainly doesn't think so.
      • daftman, on 04/14/2008, -2/+14Default Install of Photoshop CS3 on Mac does not have a main window. There are menu bars, tools windows floating everywhere.
        What does this mean? It means that your complain is a non-issue for professional designer. Only amateurs stop at the first sign of difference.
        • Anpheus, on 04/14/2008, -4/+14No, Adobe merely followed the OS paradigm. If GIMP wanted to do the same thing, they'd use a single main window on Windows, multiple windows on OSX and Linux.

          Adobe, Mozilla, a lot of cross-platform software development companies know that when it comes to the user interface, you should always have it look natural compared to the rest of the OS. In OSX, that means using aqua controls, in Linux, that means maybe even coding an interface in GTK or QT, or at the very least, using widgets that are themed by GTK/QT. Windows has traditionally used one window per program, with toolbars incorporated within that window.

          So, I see a problem with complaining about the Linux UI for being 'different,' it -should- be different. I don't see a problem with complaining about it being bad for a legitimate reason. I however, see no problem complaining about the GIMP UI in Windows being godawful. It IS godawful. It acts completely different from any other Windows editing program. THAT makes it godawful in Windows.
        • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6@Anpheus
          The Mac OS X and Windows ports of The GIMP are mostly an afterthought. The OS X version requires X11 (ask any Mac user how much they love programs who depend on X11), the Windows port while a little better for a very long time was done by a 3rd party, not the core developers. The GIMP is really a *nix/X11 image editor with recently and mostly unsupported ports to other platforms.
    • shadoweva09, on 04/14/2008, -11/+15And a cardinal rule in user interface design is that the application is not supposed to get in the way of what the user wants to do, having to manage multiple windows yourself is one of the greatest examples of breaking that rule.
      • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -5/+15I love the multiple window design -- that is, if I'm in an environment that has multiple desktop environments, one of which I can dedicate to GIMP.

        If I was on Windows, the multiple window situation would be hell... (but then... the whole Windows experience, from my perspective, is... not fun.)

        Fix for Windows users:
        1) GIMPshop:http://www.gimpshop.com/
        screenshot: http://koti.mbnet.fi/arado/Gimp/Gimpshop_12.jpg

        2) Find a way to do multiple virtual desktops. IMHO, Windows is years behind Unix and Linux DE's and WM's in this respect.
        PowerToys is the first thing that comes to mind, but I've never used it. Supposedly supports virtual desktops on XP: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/power ...

        In either case, quit whining.
        • geoboy, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4There is no reason why the GIMP should not manage its own windows. I seem to recall a little open source web browser that does a fine job of managing its own windows by putting webpages into these remarkable things called "tabs" rather than cluttering the taskbar with a window for each webpage that is open. When tabs were first introduced to the world of web browsing, it was thought of as revolutionary. Funny, that.
        • nmnnotmyname, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Yes, there is a reason for GIMP not to manage it's own windows. You can't have a single window where you tab through tool windows and stuff, so tool windows will still be separate. Plus, is it so ridicules to have a program built for a multidesktop OS to want one whole desktop to use when that's typically what it should want?

          That being said, adding support for and using tabbing by default on the photo editing window is something I've always thought would be awesome in GIMP. You can already tab things like tool boxes.
      • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8The user doesn't manage their own windows, they use a program called a window manager to do this for them. There is a reason The GIMP doesn't try to be a window manager - it could break ICCCM compliance and cause hell for people who actually use window managers. Some of more interesting window managers in the *nix world absolutely depend on the programs to be ICCCM compliant and programs should not attempt to manage their own windows. So the The GIMP UI was designed for user friendliness in mind, but it depends who is the user.
    • shadoweva09, on 04/14/2008, -8/+2And Lastly, Photoshop does have a multi window interface on Macs. They know that Macs will bring up all the windows at once, and thus can get away with it. Linux does not do this. And unless your monitors are really small, dual monitor image editing would just be getting in the way of your work most of the time.
      • daftman, on 04/14/2008, -3/+8Use compiz and the windows group functionality.
      • thtroyer, on 04/14/2008, -1/+8Dedicate a separate virtual desktop for GIMP? Most Linux DE/WM's use ctrl+alt+left/right to switch between desktops. Then you don't have to worry about other windows getting in the way, can leave all GIMP windows where you want them, and can switch between GIMP and other applications with a few quick keystrokes.
      • geoken, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1So in other words you need to totally abandon the concept of using multiple apps together (which relies on the ability to easily resize, move, minimize, maximize and bring forward an app) and instead totally segregate the apps on to different virtual desktops in order for it to be usable?
    • estvir, on 04/14/2008, -9/+16If you feel the need to suggest freaking virtual desktops as a way to make GIMP manageable, chances are the problem isn't on the OS end and stop comparing GIMP to how Photoshop works on Mac OS, it's not exactly the same.

      At least Krita is making an attempt.
      • mossblaser, on 04/14/2008, -1/+3You do realise that you can have your image window on all the desktops at once and have different desktops with different configurations of toolboxes for different types of task you can use. Its not quite as simple as the "everything on, all the time" approach that photoshop has (which i do like by the way).
      • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -1/+3"Freaking virtual desktops" is a fundamental window management feature on *nix. Metacity (one of the most basic and simple window managers around) supports virtual desktops. I see no problem with programs expecting this functionality on *nix. Maybe not on Windows, but The GIMP was never designed to be run on Windows.
      • geoken, on 04/14/2008, -2/+3I see a huge problem with a program expecting this functionality. Would you really be happy if every app seperated itself into multiple windows (which acted independently ie. wouldn't resize together, wouldn't minimize together, wouldn't move together, wouldn't be brought forward together). Would you think it's better if nautilus spread it's panels across 5 windows that acted with no cohesiveness and got mixed in with the 3 windows of firefox and the 4 windows that rhythmbox created?

        Even the name 'virtual desktop' implies it's intended usuage (namely to seperate different groups of tasks, or to segregate windows that for some reason are logically suited to be differented from other windows). The point of a virtual desktop is not to supplement an app's inability to control it's own toolbars/toolboxes to such a degree that said app can't even be on the same desktop as other apps because managing it's windows is too cumbersome.
    • sukimashita, on 04/14/2008, -4/+12GIMP breaks on many fronts. It is not just about the floating windows and proper window manager usage or other arguments one can hear such as "GIMP is meant for professionals and they use keyboard shortcuts a lot!". It starts with simple things, like the right click menu which does not adjust to the context you are clicking on is simply such a usability violation, no matter how "professional" you are. Context menus. Less annoyance. The need for a proper image editor on Linux is still the biggest demand for desktop users.
      • LingNoi, on 04/14/2008, -7/+3A professional never blames his tools.
        • shadoweva09, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4A professional doesn't use tools that suck either...
    • neko, on 04/14/2008, -2/+15I bet you guys adore programs that include their own home-rolled auto-updater too, rather than relying on the package manager.
      • geoken, on 04/14/2008, -2/+2And I bet you which nautilus was split into 5 windows and browsing 3 seperate folders required your entire taskbar to be filled with nautilus windows.
    • renegadeafk, on 04/14/2008, -0/+9Yeah I guess we shouldn't have tabbed browsers then...
      • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -2/+2Tabbed browsers are likewise a hack around poorly designed window management systems. For instance, on my usual window manager, ion3, all programs can be tabbed and grouped in any which way I please. Compiz and Fluxbox also have a similar feature. So you can have tabs for any program, including OpenOffice.org, which I find very useful. But Firefox's tabs is not a feature I need to use, it's a feature already built into my window manager, so it's redundant at best.
    • MasteRR, on 04/14/2008, -2/+4I find this all hilarious. GIMP was never designed to compete with Photoshop. It's completely independent, hence they never tried to clone the interface of Photoshop. Also, the multiple window thing: GIMP is designed solely for Linux, and works very well with most of the window managers on Linux. It is very useful with multiple desktops. They are NOT trying to change anything for other OS's because it's not designed for other OS's. Just because they decided to make a port for Windows doesn't mean they are designing it for Windows. If you are going to use something that was not designed for your OS in the first place then maybe you shouldn't complain when you use it there. Windows is not the optimal "window manager" to use the Gimp on, plain and simple.
      • hackiavelli, on 04/14/2008, -0/+5"GIMP was never designed to compete with Photoshop."

        Which is too bad because competition makes better software.
      • geoken, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4Wierd, I use Linux exclusively and I still hate the multiple window thing. IMO, a virtual desktop is to segregate a group of apps which belong to a connected workflow from apps outside of that workflow/task. Forcing me to put an app on it's own desktop because that app is unable to properly minimize, properly be moved, properly be resized, properly pushed to the lowest depth and properly be brought to the highest depth is my definition of not working well.
        • oshu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I think this is a matter of personal style. Me? I never minimize anything. I have a nice sized monitor and 8 virtual desktops. Just like you, I like to group apps that belong to the same workflow on the same desktop. I much prefer to flip between virtual desktops than to minimize/restore applications. In fact, I've turned off the taskbar completely (I use the task list for those rare occasions when I need to find something that accidentally minimized).

          The one exception are apps that minimize to the system tray. Those are usually things that run in the background and do what they do without any action on my part.

          To me, having only one desktop and having to minimize lots of apps is broken.
          • MasteRR, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Isn't there a way to remove the minimize button completely? Might keep you from accidentally minimizing some stuff.
  • Redds9, on 04/14/2008, -13/+4My days of inserting scrotum on peoples head's continues! With a new interface!
  • thetin, on 04/14/2008, -4/+8I can't wait for the new gimp!
  • FizzanoMatrix, on 04/14/2008, -8/+2Looks like more of a redux version based off that one they tried to do with Telnet a few months back.
  • Planets, on 04/14/2008, -2/+10At least the interface is semi-logical now. Looks good. I may try this.
    • pilobilus, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Looking at the screen shots I see NO changes in the user interface. This is a Good Thing. Hint: Do not accept the default configuration, find out how to customize it and rearrange things to suit yourself.
    • stoanhart, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4What's the difference? I'm a frequent gimp user, and all it looks like is that the reviewer has hidden the second tool window with layers and junk. Otherwise, they removed the menu from the top of the tool panel. Am I missing something?
  • Shadowgamers, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8It looks pretty okay compared to last versions.
  • bludo, on 04/14/2008, -2/+35I'm sorry, but it doesn't look very different to me.
    There is A LOT of wasted space. Why does that toolbox need to be so frigging huge? Where will the color selector, layers, preview window, etc. fit? Why is the status bar with px 100% so thick?
    I guess that if you are editing images like the size of the ones from screen shots it works, but I'm doing a lot of texture painting on images of 4096x4096 and every pixel of free space on my monitor counts.
    • vincentweber, on 04/14/2008, -10/+2It's open source so you could suggest the Gimp dev team to change it for the better. You can even change whatever you dislike yourself if you can code.
    • Aitese, on 04/14/2008, -1/+9Gotta agree with you on that...but I think that's more a Gnome problem (way too much white space and every button MUST be rounded, needing extra space)

      Things just are not as tight and clean as they could be.
    • siroki, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Moreover, you can customize them with drag-and-dock, similar to Photoshop. Now that the toolbox doesn't have a menu, it can be shrunk to a single column. The other stuff can be removed, and docked to a new or another tool window.
    • pilobilus, on 04/14/2008, -3/+3Right: The GIMP has the best UI in the business, fully configurable and does not waste a single pixel - IF the user wants it that way.
  • schizogony, on 04/14/2008, -6/+14I'm still partial to http://www.getpaint.net
    • nailer, on 04/14/2008, -2/+6The Linux port should be out soon - http://code.google.com/p/paint-mono/
    • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2I use Paint.net and GIMP and Picasa, all for different reasons. All of them are wonderful free programs. I'd recommend them to any amateur photographer.
      • epgui, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1I don't. While it really is a matter of taste, Photoshop and The GIMP are most often considered the standard tools, and I think we should all encourage the use of those tools. I certainly don't have anything against innovation and different things, but let's face it : big guns are most effective.
        • XristosAnesti, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Picasa is useful for cataloging images, and Paint.net has a few effects GIMP doesn't (besides having a more elegant interface).
    • epgui, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2You've got to be kidding me. =X
      I just can't understand how anyone in the world would like Paint.NET over The GIMP... personally, I even find M$ Paint more suitable for general usage than Paint.NET.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/15/2008, -0/+2That's just stupid. Paint.net is a very capable application in its own right.
  • handsomeramin, on 04/14/2008, -1/+9I know this is extremely unrelated, but what dock program is being used in the screenshots?
    • vegardjo, on 04/14/2008, -0/+13Avant Window Navigator, or AWN for short: https://launchpad.net/awn
      • Hangly, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Ok I have that. How does he make the icons go zoom all over the screen like that? I haven't figured that out yet.
        • yetAnotherCroc, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6I'm guessing you are talking about the stacks plugin. Its a plugin you can add and then put whatever you want in (files, launchers etc.) Go nuts and experiment:P
  • grigio, on 04/14/2008, -3/+19there are still too many windows opened
    • pilobilus, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Easy to fix. Add the dialogs you need to the main toolbox tab bar and close everything else down.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -3/+4Can't open an image in the main toolbox...why the hell can't it all operate in a single window? Makes no sense.
    • agenteVad, on 04/14/2008, -1/+6You shouldn't have to fix it
  • ArthurArchnix, on 04/14/2008, -4/+27What a terrible review. Didn't seem to know anything about Gimp or what new features are available. Didn't even know the difference between left and right. Buried as lame.
  • sydtsai, on 04/14/2008, -0/+12Finally, the Dual Menu Bar Mode is gone!
    Now, if it can snap your tools to the sides of a single windows.
    • pilobilus, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2That was always and only a default to make life easier on brand new users. Everyone turns the extra dock off as soon as they know they can use the tabbed dock in the main toolbar. And GIMP 2.4 and higher has an excellent alignment tool...
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1By "everyone" you mean "some people," right? 'Cause I'm pretty sure not everyone turns off the dock option. I wouldn't.
  • tracylee, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6Any chance of adjustment layers in this release?
    • arcticblue, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6From my understanding, with GEGL as the backbone, stuff like that should be possible. I remember seeing a GEGL demo a while back (way before they started putting it in to The Gimp) and they demonstrated something similar to adjustment layers.
  • drag, on 04/14/2008, -5/+48> does this support CMYK

    Sure. But I bet your printer doesn't. Most modern ones don't. As pointed out Gegl is revamping the rendering core of Gimp to blow the doors off of the previous limitations of 8bit RBGA (aka 32bit color)

    Any sort of color you want. Up to and probably including 32bit RGBA (128bit color) or even 32bit floating point colors for nearly lossless editing for HD film and such.

    Of course this is a early beta and I doubt it can do that right now. But that's the sort of thing Gegl is specificly designed to handle. This is still relatively early in the transition. If you need that right now in Linux you can always use Krita..

    > So still no parent window...

    It doesn't need one. t's designed for Linux. In Linux we have something called 'Window Managers' that actually do a very good job. Unlike, say, Windows. The easiest thing to do is simply setup a virtual desktop for gimp.

    What I like to do, personally, is setup the main toolbar and editing window on one desktop then setup all the various dialogs arrayed on the next desktop. This way I do not have to fight with overlapping windows. There are also ways to lock windows together so they don't get mixed up with windows from other applications. Also you should try your hand at configuring Gimp to edit in full screen mode. This is something that is actually very useful if you learn how to actually use this program.

    Most Windows-only folk don't realize this, but with Photoshop on Windows the parent Window thing is a throw back to deal with the crappy interface that Windows provides. If you take a look at Photoshop on OS X there is no parent window...
    See:
    http://www.wired.com/software/softwarereviews/mult ...
    *gasp* no parent window.

    BUT, if you really relay really need Gimp to run in a parent window then that is easily done with Xephyr.
    http://img59.imageshack.us/my.php?image=omggimpgx4 ...

    This is gimp running on my desktop. No hacks, just Gimp running inside of Xephyr with OpenBox window manager on my regular ol' Gimp desktop. The downside is that it can't be easily resized. But it works fine otherwise and took about 30 seconds to setup.

    ""There is A LOT of wasted space. Why does that toolbox need to be so frigging huge? Where will the color selector, layers, preview window, etc. fit? Why is the status bar with px 100% so thick?""

    You don't have to leave it like that. That's the default theme. It has a 'tiny' theme that reduces all the icons down dramatically. Then the docks themselves are movable. You can move them and drag-n-drop them out of the toolbars and such. If you want it photoshop like then just remove the docks and resize the window so it's skinny.

    "I guess that if you are editing images like the size of the ones from screen shots it works, but I'm doing a lot of texture painting on images of 4096x4096 and every pixel of free space on my monitor counts."

    That's why you can go into the preferences and configure the fullscreen mode. Personally I like to get rid of the rulers and such and make the background black. Any artist worth his salt will have most of his favorite tasks memorized so that they can access them through keyboard shortcuts. Then it's a quick F11 button to toggle in and out of fullscreen mode. Plus you can still alt-tab through windows to go back and forth exceptionally quickly between what your editing and the particular dialog your using, even in fullscreen.

    I am not saying Gimp is the best thing in the world. It does the job well enough, but of course people still love their photoshop (and with good reason)

    But really, how much personal effort have you put into learning the program or are most you guys just repeating what some guy said on his blog 5 years ago or what you saw on slashdot?
    • drag, on 04/14/2008, -2/+6http://img59.imageshack.us/my.php?image=omggimpgx4 ...

      The imageshack link didn't go through, I guess.
      • curupira, on 04/14/2008, -2/+5"> does this support CMYK
        Sure. But I bet your printer doesn't. Most modern ones don't."
        Sources? Sincerely, I doubt it. All color inkjet printers uses cyan, yellow, magenta and black, so I can't see why they would use RGB. They would be forced to convert to CMYK anyway.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -4/+1Yeah, still didn't. I didn't realize people could screw up using imageshack...that's impressive.
    • pilobilus, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4Finally, a post from a GIMP user. Thanks!
    • Yarnage, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Most printers print using CMYK. It is, after all, a set of colors for printing. RGB is meant for digital displays.
    • shmatt, on 04/14/2008, -2/+4"Your printer doesn't"
      If you mean my inkjet, no of course it doesn't. If you meant my professional printer, he uses a Heidelberg offset press, and ONLY accepts CMYK separations.
      GIMP fans don't seem to get that CMYK is not in any way a superior color space, it is simply the best one to simulate INK on PAPER. That's why we pros use it. You are LIMITING your color gamut... SRGB, ADobe RGB, RGBa, all have much wider range of hues, but on a monitor they don't portray what happens when you print the file.
      That being said, I can't use GIMP as a graphics pro intil I can natively edit CMYK. Color accuracy is IMPORTANT for us, and I won't trust a 3rd party beta plugin to be as accurate as photoshop. To me it's laughable-- but I hope someday I can ditch Adobe.
      • drag, on 04/14/2008, -1/+6You seriously think that I don't understand this!?

        How about this:
        CYMK was designed to make printing cheaper and easier. Instead of having to combine colors to make black they simply added a black ink. Easy.

        Of course it also limits your colors when working with computer image editing. Even cheap computer monitors are more then capable of displaying far more colors and more color depth then any printer can possibly make. It's the difference between transmitted light and reflected light.

        Of course computer monitors are not capable of having anywhere close to the same resolution (dpi/ppi) as a typical print out from even a cheap print. This, of course, causes havoc with fonts because the typical computer font is designed for low-resolution computer displays (~96ppi) versus professional print fonts that look exceptionally crappy on the monitor but work well on paper.

        so that's the trade off.

        Now CYMK, as you should know, isn't going to get you want you want if you are doing professional printing. It's not enough. What you need is a a print specific palate and a way to test printouts along with a decent CMS so you can at least have a educated guess about what the colors will look like.

        With Gimp and other things CYMK is pretty good to have, but really you shouldn't print directly from Gimp to any sort of professional output. That's what desktop layout/publishing applications are for and for the open source-only-using Linux fellow you'd generally be restricted to a PDF-oriented workflow with Scribus.

        And, of course, Scribus has very good CYMK support.

        What I would be more worried about if I was looking towards professional printing is basic CYMK support and very good CMS support. Going through a dozen print-outs because you can't get the color right can very quickly become very expensive.

        hint: Gimp currently has some basic CMS support (centered around ICC files) to go along with it's basic CYMK support. Nothing spectacular or really comparable to photoshop. Hopefully this changes as the 2.5 development series progresses.
    • drag, on 04/14/2008, -0/+4Oops. Ment it a bit friendlier then it came out. Sorry, didn't mean any offense.

      Check out Krita if you want native CYMK support. It's no competition to Gimp or Photoshop, but it has lots of interesting features. (such as HD-oriented movie format support) It's from KDE's Koffice.
    • ninetimes, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4Don't really want to argue, but you mention that OSX doesn't use a parent window. That's true, but the toolbars in GIMP act as separate windows, which isn't the case with Photoshop for OSX. In Photoshop, those toolbars are a different sort of UI entity. They always appear when a photoshop window is active, and disappear when photoshop is not the top/active application. This all fits into the normal OSX UI. GIMP, on the other hand, doesn't fit into any UI.
      • maruchan, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0GIMP has had the option to treat the "separate windows" as docks for a while now; it's in prefs. The separate-windows thing is a moot point as long as you take the time to set up the software how you like it. I like to set up only one window with 3 tab sections and I use TAB to raise/lower it when I'm not accessing tools via other shortcuts. Same with Photoshop, I'd die if I had to use the default settings every time.
    • drzeus, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1> Most Windows-only folk don't realize this, but with Photoshop on Windows the parent Window thing is a throw back to deal with the crappy interface that Windows provides. If you take a look at Photoshop on OS X there is no parent window...

      It may be a hack, but I personally prefer the parent window. It helps remove visual distractions. I tried Photoshop on Mac a couple times and hated it because the desktop image and other windows were constantly overpowering the image I was trying to edit.
  • csulok, on 04/14/2008, -14/+5where the ***** is the single window interface?
    • MrTea, on 04/14/2008, -5/+8it's waiting for YOU to add it
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -5/+1Why are these GNU developers so damn lazy? We should demand better service for our free products!
        • MrTea, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Why? You're not paying for it. You can always donate.
          • XristosAnesti, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1*sigh*
            The fact people didn't recognize my comment as being sarcasm indicates to me that there are too many absolute idiots around here who would actually mean something like what I said...that's depressing...

            I was pointing out how dumb it is of people to complain about free products not having all the features they want. I love GIMP, I love GNU, and I respect how accommodating the developers really are.
  • maninalift, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4Polygonal selection - there is no "draw straight lines" instead there is a bezier drawing tool - why not have bezier area selection also? This would be better, particularly if you could go back and edit the nodes to tweak the shape.
  • mahenda, on 04/14/2008, -9/+2I would still prefer Pixel http://www.kanzelsberger.com just because its UI is far more polished, even if its beta yet.
    • Elranzer, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2More like pre-alpha. Have you ever RUN the damn program. Runs slower than trying to emulate Vista under VMware on a Windows 3.1 box.
  • betacmag4u, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8For me GIMP just does everything I need and it is free. I like PhotoShop but it is not free.
  • warchildbosnia, on 04/14/2008, -0/+11I love the Gimp. I can't wait to try the new one out!
  • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -10/+8Wow, there is so much criticism and negativity toward people who actually have legitimate criticism of the GIMP ... I think the most ridiculous response was, "If you don't like it, don't use it." It's that kind of mentality which is detrimental to the development of GIMP and Linux as a whole.
    • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -5/+4I used Photoshop recently. All I wanted to do was rotate a floating selection around an axis. To figure it out, I found a hackish way to do it after 2 hours of google searches and experimenting with all the options. In The GIMP, this operating would have taken me all but five seconds. But in the end of the day, I am much much much more productive with The GIMP. Does this mean Photoshop is worse then The GIMP? Not really, it just means I don't have any experience with it. I don't talk ***** about Photoshop because I don't understand it.

      The GIMPs UI is fine. All this suggestions would make using The GIMP worse for the people who already know how to use it. Especially the MDI suggestions. That would break The GIMP on my favorite window manager, ion3.

      But thankfully The GIMP developers aren't a bunch of morons and listen to ever self righteous person on Digg who says they should implement this feature X or it'll be bad for Linux. I am grateful that The GIMP developers can take so much ***** from so many people, and still manage to stick to the principals. And do this all as volunteer work.
      • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -4/+3"I am grateful that The GIMP developers can take so much ***** from so many people, and still manage to stick to the principals. And do this all as volunteer work."

        That doesn't mean that anyone who criticizes The GIMP, especially legitimate, constructive criticisms, deserves to get Digged down. Hell, I only made a post about how people get Digged down for criticizing the GIMP, and /it/ got -3 Diggs! I saw that and could hardly believe my eyes. By logic I suppose this very post will get -6 Diggs. And how?
        • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -3/+2You got dugg down because of your self righteous tone. "which is detrimental to the development of GIMP and Linux as a whole"

          The only detriment to The GIMP and Linux as a whole in my opinion is all the whiners and morons. As I said, if the whiners get their way, The GIMP will be _ruined_ for the people like me, who actually know how to use it. I dugg most of the people whining down because:
          (1) most of the suggestions would actually ruin The GIMP
          (2) people who bitch about open source software and don't actually do anything to improve it themselves are actually hanger-ons (leeches) and the use of open source software will not improve the quality of open source software in any way.
          • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -3/+2I can't possibly imagine how group of users who mocks those who try to offer constructive criticism is actually helpful to the development of GIMP, but maybe I am missing something that the rest of you have a grasp on.

            I've been using Photoshop and a variety of the other programs in the CS for more than 10 years and I tried GIMP for several months, thinking it could possibly be a viable alternative in this respect. It wasn't, and for very specific reasons that I'm sure might be helpful for developers if only SOMEONE was willing to listen. However, I'm constantly put off by the self-congratulations of GIMP users who suggest that any user who has experienced usability problems with GIMP must either be a dumbass, a whiner, a bitch, or any number of other names I care not to repeat.
          • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -3/+1By the way, it took me literally 40 seconds to find a method for rotating an object around a point of reference in the Photoshop online help, which would be the most efficient way to rotate a selection on a so-named axis.

            Photoshop is so full featured as to be burdensome at times for simple tasks, I will give you that. However, it's so strange to knock down suggestions for improvement of GIMP on the basis that it will change how people who are used to the using the program a certain way, goes against the foundational logic that programs need to be improved so that they can be used by more people rather than fewer people.
      • Amiga500, on 04/14/2008, -3/+2I'm sorry, but I've used at least 8 different graphics programs over the years from TI-Artist to 24-bit paintbox software on the Amiga and an old SGI workstation. GIMP has one of the worst user interfaces for a program of it's intended purpose. In talking to others who frequently work with graphics for their hobby or profession, AND have used a variety of other software packages, they pretty much came to the same conclusion.

        Given that it took you 2 hours to perform one operation, I'd don't think that makes credible enough to say GIMP's UI is in any way better or worse than any graphics program. I would venture to say that given any program, you will learn how to use parts of that one program, then have trouble using anything else afterwards, perhaps due to a limitation in your ability to learn and adapt to new software.
        • sirhomer, on 04/14/2008, -1/+1Notice how I specifically said "I don't talk ***** about Photoshop because I don't understand it". Photoshop's UI would not work very well in tiled or advanced window managers. The GIMPs UI is excellent in this regard, because it is an ICCCM standards-compliant application which doesn't attempt to override the window manager's work. Really, The GIMP really isn't that difficult to figure out, and when you do it's an excellent image editor.
          • Amiga500, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1Thanks for missing the point. It took you 2 hours to solve a rudimentary problem. That shows a serious lack of problem solving skills on your part.
    • oobuntu, on 04/14/2008, -2/+3Maybe because a lot of those critics are running pirated copies of photoshop? They are trying to argue from a level-playing-field position when in fact, there are lots of people that think that just because one can steal it, it makes it free.
      I use gimp for various editing because (1) it is quite good (2) I cannot justify the cost of photoshop.
      • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -5/+0I'm not sure how the type of photoshop they use has any bearing on their criticism of the GIMP.
    • LingNoi, on 04/14/2008, -4/+2Not really because most criticism is on hearsay topics such as CMYK which was added last year. As per usual with all GIMP articles instead of discussing the awesome features it turns into another round of "Why I don't use GIMP" and as per usual all the complaints are old and about how it's not photoshop.

      Most GIMP users like how the UI is and that's all that matters, everyone else can change the defaults quite easy but then that would be too difficult, better to just complain on everything related to GIMP.
    • shmatt, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3CMYK is STILL an issue for professionals! GIMP did not 'add' CMYK, someone wrote a plugin.
    • tylerni7, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1Would you prefer us to say "If you don't like it, use it, and then whine and bitch about it" ?
      • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -0/+0How about, "If you don't like it, here's a website where developers hang out and you can discuss your constructive criticisms back and forth with developers in an open forum."
    • Gavagai80, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2So, you think that posting critcism in digg comments is an effective way to convince developers to do what you want? Heh. Actually communicating with them might work better.
      • mdude85, on 04/14/2008, -3/+0I didn't post any criticisms, so I don't know why you have any idea what I "think".
  • apoc2050, on 04/14/2008, -3/+8Hey check it out, it looks like....gimp. Fancy that.
  • fneep, on 04/14/2008, -8/+1Looking good. One step closer to a real Photoshop rival.
    • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -2/+2***** you. It's already a strong Photoshop rival.
      • imgstacke, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1uhh no its not - its UI is horrible.
  • billflu, on 04/14/2008, -1/+11"By public demand, a simple polygonal selection tool was added in this release."

    Finally!
  • shanesemler, on 04/14/2008, -12/+5I love GIMP but they need to change two things: 1.) get rid of Wilbur, I'm sorry but it just looks childish and unprofessional; 2.) change the name - it's beyond awful.
    • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -3/+6Yeah, I see what substantial issues there are with GIMP now.
      [/sarcasm]

      No one cares if you think the mascot is childish or hate the name.
      • Amiga500, on 04/14/2008, -5/+2No, you don't get it. Image matters, it has always mattered. Try picking up a chick at the bar by telling her your name is “Fart Puker” and you realize pretty quick that stupid names and lame mascots give you a bad image, hence a bad experience.

        But I wouldn't expect a nub like you to understand that. Something tells me you have about as much creative talent as house plant.
        • XristosAnesti, on 04/15/2008, -2/+2Thanks. Art photography and writing music aren't creative at all. Any house plant worth its salt can do those things, right?

          Something tells me GIMP isn't the same as Fart Puker. But I do appreciate your injection of personal experience into the discussion.
  • mikedoth, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1I so hope they develop for HaikuOS some day.
    • Elranzer, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3I hope HaikuOS gets developed, someday.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -2/+1I hope they HaikuOS to develop someday.
    • LingNoi, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Is Haiku even stable yet?
  • Rauby, on 04/14/2008, -7/+1Authors Linux.. wanna be Mac :D
  • esc27, on 04/14/2008, -8/+7Looks about the same to me. Honestly now, gimp fans can rave all they want against a single window UI, but just consider for a moment, gimp is free, multiplatform, and capable enough to compete with Photoshop, and yet Photoshop, a very expensive, closed source, limited platform, software dominates (even excluding the pirates.)
    Clearly there is something to this single window thing (even if it is only Windows users) and if gimp is to ever grow into these single window dominated markets, it must develop one itself.
    The simplest solution would be to embrace both models, default to multi-windows on everything except windows and allow the user to change it at will. A fair, open solution that empowers the user, not mulit-window (or single for that matter) elitists.
    • flashingcurser, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Keep in mind that Adobe just announced that more than half of the people using photoshop are using a pirated version. More than half are NOT paying money to use photoshop.
      • solid12345, on 04/14/2008, -1/+1And most of these people not paying are using photoshop to make their stupid little cat images on 4chan. Adobe doesn't need their business, Photoshop has always been marketed to professionals and businesses not hobbyist doodlers, they are doing fine financially on that end.
    • LingNoi, on 04/14/2008, -5/+2Photoshopers can bitch all the want about single windows, maybe if they stopped complaining in every GIMP article and took five minutes out to configure GIMP to be in a single window they'd stop complaining.. No.. that's way to easy and gives them nothing to whine about.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -0/+6I've been using GIMP for a couple years and I'm not aware of any way to configure it into a single window. Please, enlighten me.
  • PlancksCnst, on 04/14/2008, -2/+7ROFL for "HOT new splash"
  • PlancksCnst, on 04/14/2008, -0/+8That toolbar is getting really full, making it hard to find the tool your looking for. They need to use fly-outs. For example, have one generic selection button; when pressed, you get a fly-out menu with the types of selection you can do.
  • ErikHarrison, on 04/14/2008, -17/+2Should have titled the article "Linux gets PAINT!"

    Reading the developments of softwares for linux is tedious and boring. 50 releases per software. Is anything for linux a final version?

    SMILE FAGS IT'S MONDAY, ONLY FOUR 1/2 DAYS LEFT.

    - XP for life - rofl....
    • momsshizzle, on 04/14/2008, -5/+2Actually Vista owns XP.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4Actually, your mother owns Vista.

        (I dare you to make this thread worse)
        • Atomic1fire, on 04/15/2008, -1/+1Better to not have a final version,
          because that way you know that the software can always be improved for the better.
          Rather a Nonfinal version still being developed then a final version missing features
          because in most cases Something can always be improved
          and deadlines can be troublesome towards that.

          • ErikHarrison, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Well when your softwares are ALL nonfinal versions, it sucks having to keep 70 programs up to date. I am all about time management, and windows works without alot of excessive crap. Red Hat is GREAT, Unbuntu still has ALOT of work. I know it's apples to oranges, but an article about linux getting paint is just a freaking joke.
  • whencowsattack, on 04/14/2008, -2/+2By the way what is the toolbar he is using. the osx style one.
  • momsshizzle, on 04/14/2008, -9/+1GIMP, Linsux=ironic?
  • dtfinch, on 04/14/2008, -0/+7Have they fixed their lanczos3 implementation yet so we don't have to look outside of the gimp for good quality resizing?
    • dtfinch, on 04/14/2008, -0/+5Looks like they haven't.
      http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464222

      The "scaling down" part of comment #9 is also a bit unsettling.
    • dtfinch, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4I like comment #48 of http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464466
      They suggest saving an image, opening it in IE7, zooming out, taking a screen shot, and pasting it back into the gimp to get a better quality resize.
      • Peterix, on 04/14/2008, -0/+5 Comment #49 from Sven Neumann (GIMP developer, points: 24)
        2008-01-04 11:54 UTC [reply]

        You can obtain even better results by using the display down-scaling algorithm
        of GIMP itself. Just take a screen-shot of the GIMP image window.
      • XristosAnesti, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2IE7 has the worst scaling quality of anything ever.
  • icedm, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3I love GIMP.... it is one of the biggest reasons to move to Linux and not worry about getting CS2 or higher working.... I think that Ubuntu or any linux with this installed makes transition to free OS from Steal my money OS, Easier to do
    • weizbox, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2You need to update yourself with some info.
      First off, you can use GIMP in Windows.. so its not a reason to switch to Linux. It's like saying your switching to Linux for Firefox and Pidgin.
      Second, CS2 works fine with Wine, but higher versions don't for the time being.
  • gonzo1082, on 04/14/2008, -3/+4"bring out the GIMP"
    "the Gimps sleeping...."
    "wel you're just gonna have to wake him up, wont you?"
  • swrostmore, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2Did they implement WACOM support in the OSX version yet?
  • valadil, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2If you want the Gimp to look slightly more like Photoshop, try this:

    Maximize the image window. Alt tab to you Gimp control window. Right click on the titlebar of the control window and select always on top (or if you're on kde select advanced>keep above others). Drag controls to left side of screen. Now you can click around in your image and the controls will still be visible.

    Or if you're like me you'll dump all the controls off onto the second monitor and work on the image in fullscreen mode.
  • christophen, on 04/14/2008, -5/+0The Gimp will still suck if they cant give us a good extract tool.
  • brooklotzkar, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1What distro/gui is that version of GIMP running on?
    • weizbox, on 04/14/2008, -0/+3Probably Ubuntu from the look of the theme(if left to default), for the first/last couple of screen shoots at least. Easily could be almost any distro with Gnome and AWN.

      Anything you see from the screen shots is certainly not distro-specific.
      • brooklotzkar, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1IC, thanks for responding... but what app in that case gives u a toolbar similar to that screenshot (almost looks like a replica of the OSX toolbar)
      • brooklotzkar, on 04/14/2008, -0/+2Ohhh, its AWN... sorry about that dumbass comment above
  • ninesky01, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2the whole gimp in multiple windows argument is a non issue on linux. i use gimp on linux with dual monitors and it's great! one monitor holds the controls, and one holds the pic i'm working on. that wouldn't work so good if gimp was in one window. would i drag one window across the entire screen area? that's stupid... with the way the gimp is laid out, i don't have any controls covering my pic, which mean i don't have to constantly move those controls out of the way as i'm editing.

    agreed, gimp on windows sucks, but that's just because windows doesn't have a very efficient UI, and in my opinion, neither does mac. sure they look good. but linux/kde has a good looking UI, and it's efficient. if you have to move windows around, to get to other windows, you don't have a very efficient workspace.

    when you have virtual desktops, you get something magical... windows users can't appreciate it, because they don't have it. just imagine, never having to minimize a window. i have 16 virtual desktops on my machine. they are all magical. ha ha ha...

    less clicks=more efficiency, and that's the truth, boys and girls...
    • Amiga500, on 04/14/2008, -1/+1Multiple Displays > Your 16 virtual desktops. While you are switching desktops to find the window you need, I'm already looking at it.
  • samsara1981, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2Looks like someone misunderstood the meaning of 2.5.zero. Because the zero means it hasn't been separate from 2.4 for very long, and many new features will be included before 2.6. So it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to look at 2.5.zero and say, these are the new features. D'oh! Buried as lame.
  • solid12345, on 04/14/2008, -1/+2The Gimp is a fabulous piece of software for hobbyists, but what I can't stand is the Gimp nuts who keep trumping it as a professional alternative to Photoshop and put you down for wanting to pay for software. Yes Photoshop is expensive, but it is worth every penny. If you are truly serious about photography or design, Photoshop is a small price to pay. It costs money to run a business, just like you have to spend money for equipment and gas you have to spend money on software, that is just life.

  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.