GIMP 2.2 Released 577
wongn writes "Several weeks since the splash screen contest was first announced, the latest milestone release for GIMP has come about - GIMP 2.2.0 has just been officially released. Only the linux binaries and source have yet appeared. From the website: 'The GIMP developers are proud to announce the availability of version 2.2.0 of the GNU Image Manipulation Program. About nine months after version 2.0 hit the road, we have completed another development cycle and can bring a new stable GIMP to our users' desktops.'"
Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:In reality (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hooray for dumbing down? (Score:2, Interesting)
No, it's not. Visual metaphor and spatial navigation have always been very hard for me. By far the most natural interface for me is simply typing the damn name, preferably with the help of regexes.
Re:It's easier to spell (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:3, Interesting)
Luckily, the GIMP is a useable program, and if you don't want to use PS, you probably don't have to, but that's not the issue. If PS is better for the job, even considering its price, it makes sense to use it.
If you're a fundamentalist, and refuse to use anything non-open-source, that's your choice. Lucky for you, there are some good open-source options out there. But would you stick to your guns if Mozilla didn't exist (you can thank corporate dollars for that)? Would you be so sure of yourself if the GIMP had never been created? If the answers to these questions is "no," then maybe you can begin to understand why some of us, who love open-source, still use Photoshop even though it is expensive and closed-source. As far as we are concerned, there *isn't* an open-source tool for the job. The GIMP isn't even in the same category as Photoshop.
If the answer to the above question is "no," either you are young and naive, or you adopted these notions recently, because open-source software hasn't even been useable all that long. I prefer to adopt open source as the tools become sufficient for my needs. I use Firefox, FreeBSD, Apache, cygwin, Thunderbird, Ethereal, just to name a few, but I still use Win2K, Photoshop, Trillian, and a bunch of other proprietary programs because they do the job better than the open-source equivalents.
It's crazy to use an inferior program because in theory you could modify it if you needed to, or because you don't have to pay for it. Only if the sum of those benefits and the useability of the program exceed that of a closed-source app, will I ever switch.
-Dan
Re:I hope someone makes a patch (Score:2, Interesting)
And most of the time, I click or drag&drop images from my filemanager anyway.
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:3, Interesting)
But it's ok for other stuff and does have some cool features and plugins that Photoshop doesn't. But as long as I've got a license for PS, I'll stick with it.
Re:Mac Version dissected (Score:3, Interesting)
My only real complaint about it is the default theme - I've replaced it on my iBook with one called Milk 2.0 [gnome.org] which manages to look a lot cleaner and smarter than the standard.
There's this general opinion that The GIMP is somehow utterly impossible to use, but I really do disagree. I taught myself to use it very quickly some years ago, merely by sitting down and playing around with it. Compared with something like vi or Blender, it's absolutely brilliant - while it's a bit quirky in places, it's generally very consistent in how it does things, and menu entries are logically named and placed. There aren't multiple modes for the program to operate in (beyond indexed, greyscale and full-colour), and with a comprehensive help system, tooltips and so on with no hidden basic functionality, it's more akin to pico than vi...
I started off using The GIMP because it was all that I could afford. I continue using it (towards my paid work as well as hobbies such as photography and computer game design) because while I could probably afford Photoshop these days, it doesn't really offer me anything useful in addition to what I already have for free.
If you want to use The GIMP, try it with an open mind. Don't expect Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro or whatever, it's its own program in its own right, with its own advantages and disadvantages. Do appreciate that it's a cross-platform thing with its home on X11 and UNIX - the Windows and Mac ports are very close in user interface to the original, for ease of maintenance and porting. And above all, have fun.
Re:Hooray for dumbing down? (Score:3, Interesting)
The Gnome-HIG and especially their new dialogs are just a pain.
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:2, Interesting)
Soon it actally might be illegal if patent laws don't change.
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was at a Photoshop seminar last week here in Memphis. I spoke with the instructor during one of the breaks and asked him if he though there would be a native Linux version of Photoshop. He said as he shook his head up and down in a very expressive affirmative manner that due to certain non-disclosure agreements he had signed he couldn't say what he knew.
The rumor is "soon".
Mod parent up (Score:3, Interesting)
Very good point. This has been in their bugzilla (as a feature enhancement) since Sept '03 [gnome.org].
Check this out, from their wiki [gimp.org]:
What a joke! Without CMYK, the Gimp is a toy, useful for web graphics but little else. No good to design pros, or to anyone that wants to be able to produce documents to print -- I fall into that second category, and without Photoshop and/or Illustrator, or a Gimp with decent features like native CMYK, there's no way I'm shifting from OS X. Trust me, graphics people do not give a monkeys about Python-Fu .. they want decent tools, they want them to have professional features, they want a decent intuitive UI (anyone that claims the Gimp has this is either a fantatic, a troll, or has the pleasure nodes in his or brain switched with the pain ones). I am not saying this for my own sake, I'm happy using Photoshop, but for the sake of FL/OSS in general. The lack of a decent graphics package This may not sound such a big deal, but without a *n?x version of Photoshop, and the Gimp being in the state it is, this effectively cuts out the viability of using a FL/OSS OS as a graphics workstation.
Re:Seriously... Why would you use this? (Score:3, Interesting)
Compelling reasons to use the Gimp (Score:3, Interesting)
Best paint program UI: Microsoft Paint (Score:1, Interesting)
-Colors are kept in an always-visible palette of "what you're using," rather than forcing the use of the gradient or color wheel. In the fine pixeling work one uses Paint for, "what you're using" is most important. One possible improvement would be include the colors used in the image over the defaults.
-When you grab a color it immediately goes to painting with the new color(PS does nothing and GIMP OPENS the grabber box)
-Selections are intuitive, if inflexible. When you pick something up the right button's color is left underneath. Layers would be nice to see but I doubt they'd ever appear.
These small, most-used features are what continue to make Paint an appealing program even when its competition offers far more.