I really wish gimp had a command palette, kinda like the Ctrl+Shift+P thing in VSCode. As a beginner in gimp I often know approximately what I want to do, but not how to find that thing and just being able to type "crop", "scale", "add layer" and have it happen would be much easier than having to look for it through various menus.
post
gimp is good
I've used gimp so long, the Photoshop has a weird ui/ux to me
Best transition for me was to go in and define my own keyboard shortcuts that matched the ones from Photoshop
I love GIMP for what it’s done for the community but I can make a circle in Krita.
Unless I'm missing something about how to use it the text tool in Krita is terrible though. Been designing cards with people the last few weeks and we ended up making the general design and layout in Krita then brought things into GIMP to add text
literally just a few minutes ago i tried to edit an icon in gimp to make a red line. problem 1: it couldn't make red color...or any other colors either except the one that the icon had. problem 2: how the heck do you even make a line? so instead of watching a tutorial on how to make a FFFFUUUUCKING LINE, I succeeded with pinta in 3 seconds.
Well, if you can't make a circle in GIMP, then you have quite a lot to learn. I just asked my kid who's 7, and she easily makes a circle. She would like to show me all the shapes she makes in a minute or two... When I asked her, she made a square, rectangle, triangle, drop, circle, star, lightning, oval, cros and a few more, where she named them all... She had fun doing it, so thanks for that... But please, go practice. BTW I like Krita too - I just don't feel the need to blame any tool for being different from another. :-)
Can I ask you... how often do you really draw a circle, for this to be an issue?
Here's a little guide. My daughter uses the selection tool, to make a lot of shapes... ;-)
Pretty harsh response given that a proper shape tool, and specifically the ability to draw a circle, is on the GIMP roadmap.
I do not think it is the most essential functionality but even the project sees it as missing.
Yeah, it is on the roadmap. So it's pretty harsh to keep whining about it. It's not like it's something that is impossible to do. It's not like people support the development that much or at all... It's just (I want more free stuff, buhuuu)...
It's a nice to have in software like GIMP, it's not need to have.
The first two sets of instructions are for drawing a disc, rather than a circle (a disc being a filled-in circle) and don't extend to drawing a circle easily. The last method does, but it is about 10x as long. The traditional method for drawing a circle was to select the inner circle, save the selection to a channel, grow the selection by the pixel width of the stroke you want, subtract the saved selection, then fill. Wonderful /s
GIMP does not (unless I missed it in a ~recent update) have a shape tool like most image editors. The GIMP documentation in any case suggests using Inkscape for the purpose.
GIMP apologists are what Adobe users think FOSS apologists are like. The principled refusal to even consider fundamental UX principles is astounding.
Yeah you might be right.
I should clarify I use GIMP. A lot! But this is one way it sucks. By this point I don't know what other similar programs even have over it - it finally got adjustment layers after some decades. So if I can recognise this shortcoming anyone should be able to ;)
The other major thing was switching to single window mode. Floating windows for everything was absolutely batshit.
Good thing GIMP went single window before Wayland popularity spiked.
Was there a known issue there?
Most Wayland compositors don not have the concept of multiple windows being one application. And you cannot always control how and where they appear.
This is not a Wayland complaint. Just pointing out that old GIMP was just not very compatible with the core Design of Wayland.
Depending on what compositor you use, a lot of this has really improved.
I'm sorry to hear, that it's that difficult for you to draw a circle. It takes me about 15 seconds to make the perfect circle I want. To me, that is simply the time it takes to make it perfect. If I just want a circle, I can do that much quicker...
So how many times a day do you need to make a circle? When I use Affinity, Inkscape, Krita, GIMP, I don't very often draw a circle. Most of the time, I do it in Inkscape, because it's great to make shapes, but there's a wast difference between a program to make vector graphics, and to make and edit bitmap pictures.
Are you really going to get defensively patronising over this? I think I'mma bounce, lol.
One thing that GIMP was always far superior on was cutting people out from single-colour backgrounds. All kinds of hassle on any other tool, with even the simplest workflow needing a tonne of refining and touching up. With GIMP, you just select the colour & hit “color to alpha”. Done. It even gets all the tricky hair semi-transparencies.
Are there any other YouTubers like bread that have straight forward Linux videos?
The one news dude I liked listening to got in a car accident and is slowly getting back into posting
https://tinkerbetter.tube/c/veronicaexplains/videos
There's Veronica Explains!
Don't forget Andrea Borman
Good idea for a video.
It definitely took me some time getting used to GIMP after nearly 20 years as a photoshop user but I'm very glad I did.
I downloaded Photo GIMP and had very little issues doing what I needed. I've dabbled with PS for years mostly for editing actual photos and designing graphics, but never professionally, just as a hobby. The mod just works.
Sounds like a good resource, but I prefer documentation over videos for how-to guides. I'm glad you posted this, though, thanks.
Every time I've tried gimp I walked away frustrated. I left photoshop behind long ago, only ever used it for messing around. But everything just kind of made sense. I felt like none of the skills I learned transferred to gimp, and I was always fighting against the design language.
I've saved this video to give a watch later, thanks for posting.
I had that in the beginning too. Once you're used to the basics you'll find that most of what you've learnt does transfer though.
I think part of the problem, at least for me coming from 20 years on photoshop, was searching for "how do I do this advanced technique in GIMP" before learning the basic layout/structure/tools etc.
YMMV but I highly recommend watching an hour or two of an introductory GIMP course. It's what made it click for me.
The same with Darktable and Lightroom.
Darktable is more powerful (a few thinhs missing though, like panos) but it's UI is way different and super complex.
Krita is better and doesn't have a non-professional, ableist name.
Could you please explain what you mean by "professional ableist name"?
GIMP is a slur for people with disabilities, therefore it isn't a name many professional artists, nor those that care about ableism will like.
The program started off as IMP, Image Manipulation Program. They added a G (General) to make it a reference to a character in Pulp Fiction.
The name's history has nothing to do with ableism. Besides, not many artists care; look up what a "gimping machine" is :).
Words can have multiple meanings and context matters a lot. Besides its usage as a slur is pretty outmoded by now.
Well, it is still considered that by disabled people and that is who really matters in all this.
Until they drop the name, it'll continue being considered unprofessional and not in good standing with those of us who care about disabled people, especially if we are disabled ourselves.
Thank you. I get that this can be problematic, but as a non english-native, I don't think it's that big of a deal. GIMP is a transnational project after all and as I understand they try their best to be (all)inclusive. Getting hung up on the very well established name and outright demanding (in another comment), seems a bit silly to me. Were it a more serious slur, one that may be more timely relevant, I would feel the same, but given what I just described, I don't feel that harsh about it.
Very hot take: I actually prefer it having that name, because it can lead to that term not being recognized as a slur by newer generations. When being asked "Whats a gimp?" they might then answer "An image processor.". Would eliminate a whole slur. And with time it might even go so out of fashion it gets eliminated from dictionaries. Instances of this exact phenomenon happening include, in developing order: Dude, Yankee, Nerd. Or if you want a devolvement: Bully, which used to mean sweetheart. Language is like that. Let the slur die.
That aside, I do not feel that Krita is better than GIMP technologically. I prefer both.
Perhaps when the time comes to fork the project we can avoid a slur as a name? That would be nice.
Are you yourself affected by this? Maybe I, as a non affected person, am misjudging.
Perhaps when the time comes to fork the project we can avoid a slur as a name? That would be nice.
Sadly this was already tried and the developers of the fork were abused and harassed as foss and tech obsessives hate being called out for things and folks solving the problem themselves.
What I meant by "when the time comes to fork, let's use another name" was not "let's fork it for the sole purpose of rebranding". For me a good reason to fork a project would be governance. "Hate forks", whatever the fuck that made up phrase may be, cause division, so I absolutely understand why people would be against this. That being said, malicious branding is more often than not connected to bad governance, so that would be interesting to find out.
This seems to be quite the nuanced issue, so this will be the last I said, but I would be hella interested to see some more viewpoints on this.
“let’s fork it for the sole purpose of rebranding”
That wasn't the only thing they did, the legitimately wanted to fix a lot of problems with the GNU Imp too.
so I absolutely understand why people would be against this
Nobody deserves harassment and abuse for changing the name of something.
You got the name of the fork? I'd be interested.
If they did change stuff technically whcih wouldn't be adressed otherwise, then I don't see a reason. Sounds like bad actors.
I did not even talk about harassment, that was you. But I agree, you shouldn't harass people for this. Does not change that I am against hate-forks, which this did sound like at first.
If they did change stuff technically whcih wouldn’t be adressed otherwise, then I don’t see a reason. Sounds like bad actors.
I don't understand what you mean here, could you please explain again?
Sorry, badly phrased. If they actually changed stuff technically in their fork, then I see no reason why one would criticize that. That is literally what a fork is for.
Yes, they did actually change things technically. Thanks for clarifying 🙂
I don't actually see that though, taken a look at their repo, they only seemed to remove branding and easter eggs to distance themselves from the GIMP project. They even went so far as to linger on versions and not merge features from GIMP, so they were actually behind. That would be what I mean by hate fork. Nothing technically good has been done with the repo.
Edit: I think they wanted to change the UI abit too for better accessibility, which would actually be a technical change for once, but other than that I don't see anything contributed to better software.
all 8 comments