Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The GIMP Now Has a Working Single-Window Mode

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the how-long-were-the-contractions dept.

The Gimp 403

An anonymous reader writes "Phoronix is reporting that The GIMP now has a working single-window mode, a long desired feature by the open-source graphics community to be more competitive with Adobe Photoshop. There's also a number of other user highlights in the new GIMP 2.7.3 release. The GPLv3 graphics software can be downloaded at GIMP.org."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't they do this every couple of years? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178322)

And the photoshop people still don't switch, because it doesn't have their favourite plugin.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Informative)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178404)

No they don't do this every couple of years.

But the main reason Photoshop people don't switch is that Photoshop isn't all that expensive if you use it every day. GIMP also does not have 16-bit color or CMYK.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Insightful)

croddy (659025) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178496)

Okay, cool, so they don't want to use it? Good deal! I guess we can stop porting their shitty 1980's UI and window management models to it now, then, can't we? Can we just rip this fucking single-window crap right back out and put the GIMP back the way GIMP users use it, and not the way a handful of Photoshop dilettantes keep saying the GIMP *should* be so they can switch?

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178530)

Whoa, you're saying the PHOTOSHOP users are the "dilettantes"? Does that mean GIMP users are the "professionals"? Because I have never met a graphics professional who used GIMP and most have never even heard of it. And no, a webdesigner is not a graphics professional.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Insightful)

croddy (659025) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178560)

I am saying that the Photoshop users clamoring for GIMP to be like this and GIMP to be like that are the dabblers, and don't represent the vast majority of Photoshop users, who as far as I can tell are happy with what they have and just have some work to get done.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178850)

I haven't used Photoshop in years and I'm no professional. I have used GIMP and I can say that single window is a welcome change for me.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178688)

No no no no no...there are two groups of PS users out there. Those who use it for their work (and bought it), and those who should that it is superior to everything else (illegal copies). Ironically, only those who didn't buy it seem to shout loudest that GIMP is bullshit and can't be used. I have yet to meet one graphic designer who says that GIMP is not usable for him because of the multi-window-environment.

I'm pretty sure croddy meant the second group, because the first group does have constructive/good criticism and better things to do.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Interesting)

Intron (870560) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178858)

There's a reason that the dabblers complain about the GIMP. Have you ever read through one of those tutorials on how to do some cool graphics technique, like floating semi-transparent 3D letters above a picture? They tend to be written as "go to the *X Menu* and select *Name*" so they can't be translated to a program that has different menus and names. The dabblers don't know how to do things, just how to follow recipes.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (4, Insightful)

silanea (1241518) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178950)

croddy falsely assumes that anyone who believes the multi-window approach sucks donkeys' balls has been spoiled by Photoshop. GIMP is the only application I have ever consciously encountered and used for more than two seconds that uses this paradigm, and it annoys the bloody hell out of me. Just how Microsoft's ribbons suck for me, and how I hate GNOME 3 and Unity for breaking conventions that work extremely well for me and replacing them with something that does not reflect my way of using a computer. The multi-window approach is one out of many possible paradigms. That very few other applications (relicts from the computational stone age excluded) use it should be sufficiently strong indication that it may not be an unproblematic approach. And that insight should, in an ideal world, lead to the conclusion that offering the dominant paradigm as an option will enhance the software and improve its usefulness for a significant number of people.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178712)

Can we just rip this fucking single-window crap right back out and put the GIMP back the way GIMP users use it, and not the way a handful of Photoshop dilettantes keep saying the GIMP *should* be so they can switch?

It says "working single-window mode." Mode implies that single window functionality can be turned on and off. So there should be no need to "rip this fucking single-window crap right back out" as you so quaintly put it.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178954)

As well there should be. Having a single window that spans two monitors only works well if both monitors have the same resolution. Otherwise it tends to be somewhat awkward. What's wonderful about the current system is that I can place my tools on one monitor along with a view of the whole image and do my manipulation on the other monitor.

Just as long as they keep the older multi-window mode I don't have any problems with this.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (3, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178724)

Here is some work [youtube.com] by photoshop dilettantes [youtube.com]

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (4, Insightful)

djdanlib (732853) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178646)

No, the main reasons are: it's a recognizable brand, employers provide Photoshop for their employees, colleges have it in their labs, it supports most digital cameras' RAW formats, and everyone freakin' pirates it when they're studying photography or design or print media or whatever other visual art. Seriously, it's rampant. I know MANY people who pirated Adobe products and continued to use them in their careers. Basically, nobody ever paid for it except the odd one or two. I feel like the oddball, having actually purchased Photoshop CS rather than pirating it back when I was in college - my peers even made fun of me for it. "You mean you actually paid for that? Why didn't you just download it? I would have given you a copy." (Of course, mine actually worked properly, and theirs didn't always.) You'd think that would be something you could buy with your student loans, even though the 'student price' is still rather expensive for an average photo student.

GIMP is poised to be at least average in digital photo manipulation. It doesn't stand out as a shining example of technological achievement, but it's at least average.

Most digital photography goes straight to the Web, and you don't need CMYK for that. You need sRGB. If you're the one sending images to a printer, yes you want to handle CMYK. Once you profile your average photo printer, as long as you're outputting in the right color space - you should get really good results. CMYK is mostly of interest to electronic prepress: think books and newspapers. But your average photographer doesn't need that. They have a prepress department to handle the conversion and bit depth reduction. In fact, many printers and RIPs accept profiled RGB images these days, so converting to CMYK may or may not gain you anything in the end. Your mileage will most definitely vary.

Your point about HDR is valid. HDR has been the new hotness for years.

One thing Adobe products do well is decoding Camera RAW formats. That's a big deal, since you can slightly adjust your exposure post-shoot. Otherwise you have to either use 8-bit-per-channel JPEG, or pay the manufacturer for the full software. The 'lite' version usually comes with the camera but you can't do everything Adobe does. GIMP could really break into the market if they packaged UFRaw with the software.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178958)

Erm, you mean 16-bit per channel right? I'm pretty sure it supports 32-bit color (24-bit if you don't use alpha)

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178418)

More like because they've already learned the Photoshop interface, and can't be bothered learning another.. especially if they already suck with computers.

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

errandum (2014454) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178494)

And maybe because Photoshop is actually good value?

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178764)

Right. Because GIMP's only goal is to be usable to Photoshop users and make them stop using Photoshop.

Not!

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178852)

What is GIMP's goal?

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179022)

What is GIMP's goal?

Being good at image manipulation?

Re:Don't they do this every couple of years? (5, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178818)

And the photoshop people still don't switch, because it doesn't have their favourite plugin.

Why does it have to be about switching?

As an experienced Photoshop user let me give you a little tip: Instead of trying get Photoshop users to switch, why not tantalize them with how it can be an additional tool in their toolbox?

Let's say, for example, that GIMP has an extra awesome macro-recording/playback capability that makes Photoshop look like a toy in comparison. (I don't know if this is the case or not so please forgive my ignorance.) If you were to say to me: "You can record a macro in GIMP, then apply this sophisticated set of rules to it that PS doesn't have, and easily set it up to run on all the files in a folder", then I'd go and try it out!

Take out the switching talk and you'll gain a lot more interest. Otherwise you're fighting this huge uphill battle where you have to take into account way too many things that are of importance. Then you'll sit there thinking Photoshop users are mindless fans that lack your vision when in reality you just haven't addressed their needs.

Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178330)

Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.

And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you ever knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.

Re:Golden Girls! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178678)

Your heart is true, you're a pal and a confidant.

FTFY

to be competitive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178344)

It needs (A) not just single window mode, but a complete overhaul of the UI and manner of operation to make it more intuitive, and (B) GPU acceleration. Among other things! It lacks many professional features.

Re:to be competitive (4, Informative)

datapharmer (1099455) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178414)

Can I add proper detection of image dpi to you list? Gimp seems to think every jpeg is 72dpi which is kind of a non-starter when using it for anything but web images.

How to create new Exif data? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178510)

Gimp seems to think every jpeg is 72dpi which is kind of a non-starter when using it for anything but web images.

Exif data is supposed to handle this, but has anyone else figured out how to create Exif data for a new image? The "Save Exif data" checkbox in Save as JPEG appears to be grayed out unless the image already had Exif data when I opened it.

Re:to be competitive (4, Insightful)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178526)

Actually I consider it very intuitive. Maybe it's because I've not been trained by Photoshop, and thus don't confuse "it works like Photoshop" with "it is intuitive".

But if they now have a Photoshop-like MDI interface, maybe they can undo some negative changes in the multi-window interface (like, add back the main menu to the tools window and don't force an otherwise useless image window without an image to be open just to have the main menu available). The Photoshop-UI-lovers can just use the MDI interface.

Re:to be competitive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178552)

Exactly. Just smashing all those floating windows into a single-window mode shows that the developers actually had no idea what users were wanting. The GUI just looks atrocious. The saddest part is this actually took years of work to do.

NOOOOO!!!! (4, Funny)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178348)

I just learned the old interface! :)

Re:NOOOOO!!!! (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178450)

It's not clear from the summary or even the article whether the new single-window mode can be turned off. Nor is it clear whether I can try GIMP 2.7.3 (development channel) for Windows on the same system as my existing 2.6.11 (stable channel) installations.

Re:NOOOOO!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178700)

Actually, Single-Window mode has to be explicitly turned ON.

http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2011/08/gimp-2-7-3-released-working-single-window-mode-layer-groups/

Re:NOOOOO!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37179110)

It can be turned off, it is not, afaik, even turned on by default.

Hasn't this been around awhile? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178374)

I started my new job 4 months ago. This was one of the features that I hated about gimp that they *had* added which makes it easier for me personally to work with. Dare I say, 'more like photoshop?'

Re:Hasn't this been around awhile? (0)

carcomp (1887830) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178394)

Sorry, claiming my comment.

Re:Hasn't this been around awhile? (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178462)

I think you installed GimpShop by accident.

YES! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178396)

For so long I've waited. Now my dreams have been realized.

Re:YES! (3, Informative)

carcomp (1887830) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178420)

You still have to fight the layers system when working with PSD files though. ARGHH why do designers get CS5 and us web guys get to use whatever we can find ;)

Re:YES! (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178900)

Could I trouble you to elaborate more on what you mean by 'fight the layers system'?

Just curious.

Read the article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178400)

So what is single window mode and what will it buy me?

Re:Read the article (1)

mdmkolbe (944892) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178504)

Seconded! I want pics!

It'll buy you familiarity (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178540)

As far as I can tell, it'll buy you familiarity: an easier transition from Adobe Photoshop software or other mainstream proprietary image editing software. It'll also buy you less frustration when working on a smaller monitor, as Ctrl+E (resize window to fit image) won't push the window controls under the tool palettes anymore.

Re:Read the article (2, Interesting)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178610)

So what is single window mode and what will it buy me?

The current GIMP interface is a multi-window affair which many find hard to grasp for one reason or another, or just find inconvenient.

A single window environment will improve your productivity if:
* you have trouble with the existing interface
* you have never used the existing interface, and are trying the program after using other graphics tools (i.e. less retraining effort as it should in theory be closer to what you are already used to using)
* you just don't like the existing interface

I'm quite happy with GIMP the way it is, though I would probably be quite happy with the single-window mode too if that became default (caveat: I don't do a lot of graphics editing, so I can't claim my opinions on the matter come from a position of expertise). I think the multi-window arrangement made more sense than it does now back when focus-follows-mouse was the dominant focus control method in unix-a-like environments, but almost everyone now uses click-to-focus.

That's development release (5, Informative)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178412)

Use it with care, as it is development release with rather large rewrites and therefore not suitable for production use. For this release I honestly don't care about single window mode as I'm not Windows drone - GEGL improvements and usage, new text entry mode, and lot of other small improvements interests me more.

Official release in fall/spring (as far as I understood).

Re:That's development release (1, Insightful)

hattig (47930) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178506)

Does it now include effect layers and better text support?

I remember playing with Gimp in 1998, and in many ways it just hasn't moved forward UI-wise. It will be interesting to see how, err, gimped this single-window UI is.

Re:That's development release (3, Interesting)

isopropanol (1936936) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178542)

Still no 16 bit per pixel images (it can import them, but not work in 16 bit).

Re:That's development release (3, Funny)

isopropanol (1936936) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178620)

erm .. I mean 16 bit per channel.

Re:That's development release (3)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178612)

For this release I honestly don't care about single window mode as I'm not Windows drone

Only Windows can do single window mode? Linux always has either none or multiple windows?
Otherwise how would caring about single window mode require one to be a Windows drone?

I for one think it's nice to be able to have the screen focused on a single purpose without a distracting background or icons and windows you might accidentally click. Particularly the visually distraction of it all. Ever noticed how Photoshop has a very dull and gray interface?

The thing that drives me nuts (0)

raddan (519638) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178868)

IIRC, toolbar behavior was especially frustrating for me-- they weren't floating, they tended to be buried under things, and they sometimes got sent to the wrong virtual desktop. GIMP's usability issues made me finally throw in the towel. I went out and bought an old copy of Photoshop, which installs and runs just fine on WINE and Ubuntu 11.04. Now I'm happy.

The GIMP probably has more features than said old version of Photoshop, but if they're unusable to me, they might as well not be there, right? As a point of reference, I spend at least 10 hours a day looking at code (mostly Scala, C, and Ruby). I find using the GIMP harder than reading code. I think the single window thing is a step in the right direction-- maybe I'll try it again.

Re:The thing that drives me nuts (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179186)

IIRC, toolbar behavior was especially frustrating for me-- they weren't floating,

There's an option about whether to keep toolbars on top (it might be that this wasn't yet there when you used it, though). Of course it also depends on whether your window manager honours the request.

they tended to be buried under things

Isn't that the same complaint as before?

and they sometimes got sent to the wrong virtual desktop.

Never happened to me. Maybe I was just lucky, maybe my window manager is better (it's the window manager's job to put the window on the correct desktop, AFAIK GIMP cannot do anything about it), or maybe my usage pattern just doesn't lead to such problems.

Re:That's development release (2)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178884)

Only Windows can do single window mode?

Of course programs on other operating systems could do "single window mode" (i.e. MDI). However normally only programs on Windows do.

Linux always has either none or multiple windows?

"Single window mode" here means MDI, i.e. having a single main window with subwindows instead of multiple independent windows.

I for one think it's nice to be able to have the screen focused on a single purpose without a distracting background or icons and windows you might accidentally click. Particularly the visually distraction of it all. Ever noticed how Photoshop has a very dull and gray interface?

Nobody forces you to have a distracting background. And if the desktop GIMP is running on contains any windows other than those related to your image editing (which may include non-GIMP windows), well, why did you open them on that desktop to begin with?

And MAC OSX Just Got.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178488)

And MAC OSX just got windows that can be resized at more than one corner.

Technological breakthroughs are happening all around us!
 

..windows that can be resized .. (1)

advid.net (595837) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179018)

That would be a huge improvement !

Please provide a link, as I don't see the news anywhere ...

Maybe they also managed to get [,],` and | characters printed on their keyboard ? Or at least have their shortcut mentioned in the system help.

The next revolution would be an application menu bar closer to the document itself : 9" screens of mac classic are over now, the mouse has quite a long way to go across the 22" screen to reach the file menu ...

need to fix the critical bugs! (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178500)

For example, in the most recent version of GIMP, it doesn't even START without segfaulting in the default configuration of many distros:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1746905&mode=linear
http://www.techjail.net/solved-gimp-not-launching-on-kubuntu-11-04.html

Yes, there is a workaround, but sheesh - this looks *massively* unprofessional compared to photoshop. Having your program not work *out of the box* on the single most popular linux distro out there makes for a horrible initial impression.

Very unprofessional.

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178630)

You say many distros, and quote ubuntu&kubuntu (which have the same gimp package)? So it works in all but ubuntu?
Doesn't that just mean that ubuntu's packagers screwed up?

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178672)

It's actually just Kubuntu, some kind of screwup related to the Oxygen KDE theme.

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178644)

Photoshop doesn't work out of the box on the single most popular linux distro out there, either.

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178684)

Photoshop doesn't work out of the box on the single most popular linux distro out there, either.

Yeah, because that "most popular" Linux distro has half of 1% of the desktop market share. Basically it is nothing more than statistical noise.

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179074)

1% can be an awful lot of money left on the table. Corporations that ignore a subset of the market because it's only 1% tend not to do well in the long term.

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178746)

sheesh - this looks *massively* unprofessional compared to photoshop. Having your program not work *out of the box* on the single most popular linux distro out there makes for a horrible initial impression.

You run photoshop with Wine, aren't you? Kebab!

Re:need to fix the critical bugs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178766)

For example, in the most recent version of GIMP, it doesn't even START without segfaulting in the default configuration of many distros:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1746905&mode=linear
http://www.techjail.net/solved-gimp-not-launching-on-kubuntu-11-04.html

Yes, there is a workaround, but sheesh - this looks *massively* unprofessional compared to photoshop. Having your program not work *out of the box* on the single most popular linux distro out there makes for a horrible initial impression.

Very unprofessional.

Never once had that issue with SuSE, Fedora, RHEL, Knoppix, Mint, Slackware.... yes I do try lots of different distos and never once had GIMP segfault. And yes I do use GIMP often.

Working on the right features, I see (4, Insightful)

MSojka (83577) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178516)

Wake me up when I can finally use 16, 32 or 64 bits per channel, and the channels aren't restricted to RGBA or integers ...

Re:Working on the right features, I see (3, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178770)

While that would be nice, by far the worst thing about Gimp is the UI. It may be OK on a desktop with a big screen but I was trying to edit an image on my laptop recently and with all the windows splattered everywhere, most of them forcing themselves to the front all the time because, my God, the font window is so much more important than the image I'm trying to edit, I ended up with about a quarter of the screen available for editing.

I'm really hoping that this is an improvement.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (2)

Ragondux (2034126) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178962)

I'm not so sure single-window is an improvement on small screens. I remember much frustration while using Inkscape on a netbook a while ago, because its single window didn't fit in my resolution, and my window manager had strange ways of dealing with that.

With a Gimp-like UI I would just have move the toolbars to another desktop and switched between desktops with a keyboard shortcut.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (2)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179044)

I'm not so sure single-window is an improvement on small screens.

Not with the way Duh Gimp people implemented it, that's for sure. All they did was take the lazy route of smashing the formerly floating windows into a single window. That's really not the way to have done it. The single window mode also needed a subsequent REDESIGN of the UI. The UI now just looks like a cluttered mess.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (4, Interesting)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178784)

Wake me up when I can finally use 16, 32 or 64 bits per channel, and the channels aren't restricted to RGBA or integers ...

Overkill slightly? Power dynamic range from single photon starlight to laser eye damage is only about 100 dB... You can't buy 64 bit A/D converters, unless you're talking about some kind of marketing thing where you have 4 16 bit A/D in the same box. LCD monitors are very low contrast, just barely above 20 dB, paper and ink's only about 10 dB.

There does not seem to be a practical input or output technology that can use more than 16 bits. 8 bits is probably too low. I would advocate for 16 bit, but 32 is as pointless as using scientific notation for each channel.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178912)

There does not seem to be a practical input or output technology that can use more than 16 bits. 8 bits is probably too low. I would advocate for 16 bit, but 32 is as pointless as using scientific notation for each channel.

He may not be talking about 32 bit integers. 32 bit floats do have advantages.

Anyway, if you can't think of a use for 32 bit integer image channels, maybe you're the one lacking imagination.

CAPTCHA: penciled

Re:Working on the right features, I see (4, Interesting)

dada21 (163177) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178986)

16bits per channel is really important.

I own some print shops, we take artist original prints and paintings and produce reproductions, a la Giclée. We scan as high res as possible, with as many bits per color channel as possible.

Since no scanner is eprfectly color accurate, we do some post production work in Photoshop. 8bits per channel does bring some loss to saturation, contrast and gradients during post production. 16 bits per channel lessens these effects.

Do we use 32 bits? Almost never, but it does come in handy in *rare* instances. Recently we had to scan a painting with metallic inks. 32 bits per channel actually allowed us to properly map the metallic colors to our metalic ink on our printer.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (3, Interesting)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179068)

32bit per channel isn't out of the realm of sanity - think computer graphics.

But 64bit? That's pushing it more than a little.
http://www.anyhere.com/gward/hdrenc/hdr_encodings.html [anyhere.com]

Maybe if you wanted to capture in a single scene the darkest material ever made, in the shadow of a nuclear explosion.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179146)

That's not true, having extra bits per channel doesn't expand the dynamic range, it does however give you more values in that range than you would otherwise have. Most of the extra values end up corresponding to things that would be unrecoverable because they're too dark to be registered.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178874)

Sorry, GIMP is not for you. As a professional highly trained graphic artist, sorry virtuoso!, GIMP will never be able to fulfill your needs. Only the best is good enough for you. Only the best can ever be enough for you.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (1)

GroundBounce (20126) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179118)

True, and lets not forget to add:

Non-destructive editing.
a 10x increase in speed of the basic engine (which will be needed for non-destructive editing)
A macro recorder to easily record repetitive operations.
photo-shop like history operations

A single window mode is not the most important thing GIMP needs to compete with Photoshop

Re:Working on the right features, I see (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179200)

and add: unified transform tool.

I think GEGL might be a good aid in points 1 and 2 you made, though. I do hope they'll be making use of it to work at the resolution on display (manipulate only a few pixels) and 'render' that to the full res in the background, and tiled management so that if I do work on a small piece of a gigapixel image, it doesn't try doing so on the full copy in RAM (and inevitably swap file), but just the tiles I'm hitting.

In the mean time, I guess I keep adding RAM and speeding up the SSD RAID.

Re:Working on the right features, I see (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179188)

Not to mention they spent that effort duplicating something that has already been done years ago by GimpShop [gimpshop.com] :

"It shares all GIMP's advantages, including the long feature list and customisability, while addressing some common criticisms regarding the program's interface: GIMPshop modifies the menu structure to closely match Photoshop's, adjusts the program's terminology to match Adobe's, and, in the Windows version, uses a plugin called 'Deweirdifier' to combine the application's numerous windows in a similar manner to the MDI system used by most Windows graphics packages."

Screenshot? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178550)

You'd think a story about a major UI change would come with a screenshot or something...

Re:Screenshot? (5, Funny)

whoop (194) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178832)

Everyone here would just say it was photoshopped.

How about a mode... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178556)

where you don't have to do "Flatten Image" after each operation, and where you're not prompted to "Save the changes to image before closing" just because you selected a rectangle?

And yet... (-1, Offtopic)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178704)

It's still called The GIMP. And the Linux fanboys can't figure out why their adoption rates are poor. Can you imagine getting up in front of a board and being asked what tool you used? Or trying to start a company initiative to switch people over to The GIMP?

In the grown up world, people don't giggle about ass-rape. All the name does is cause people to doubt the GIMP team's professionalism. It's a distraction. Can't we at least get a fork that just changes the branding?

there be dragons ... (1)

gDLL (1413289) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178920)

you are assuming that everyone knows what "gimp" means. yes we have computers too.

Re:And yet... (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179030)

After all these years, all I've seen is complaints about the name but nobody steps up and actually forks it and changes the name.

Re:And yet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37179040)

Can't we at least get a fork that just changes the branding?

Yep. Can't wait to see what you come up with.

Re:And yet... (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179116)

There's always Cinepaint. They forked from GIMP 1.04 IIRC and they do support 16bits per channel.

Re:And yet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37179122)

Call it The Machine!

Re:And yet... (3, Insightful)

cyberthanasis12 (926691) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179142)

I've posted this several times since last millennium... Please consider the fact that the vast majority of people (myself included) do not speak English (as their native language). To us, GIMP means no more than IBM, and it sounds better than Photoshop.

Yes but.... (1)

Yo Grark (465041) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178742)

Yes but can you draw a straight line yet intuitively without having to look up a tutorial? :)

Yo Grark

bloody hell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178796)

Some of actually use a decent window manager.

Yet another case of a small but vocal minority screwing things up for the rest of us.
"Oh noes, this don't work like photoslop, it sucks, rebuild it the way I am used to."

This is why we can't have nice things.

Repeat after me, "Photoshops ui is NOT the one true way"
Different programs work differently.
It is hard and akward because it is different, Not because it is bad.

The few times I have used photoshop, I get anoyed and angry because I can't figure anything out.
So, obviously, I go to all the photoshop forums and yell how crappy it is.
Because my being unable to use the program is not my fault, It is the programs.

Diverse user inferface can be a wonderful thing.
Look at blender, pain in the ass to learn, one of the fastest workflow interfaces I have ever seen.
I can only hope the efforts to make it easier to learn do not hurt it's useabilty(hint: they usually do)

I despise user friendly software.
I prefer my software "Expert Friendly"

It never fails... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178800)

Over the years I love reading stories and comments on gimp, I enjoy using the program. For the record I absolutely love the multi window layout when I am using Linux but in Windows or OSX I hate it. Every time a story comes out about Gimp there are always people who bash it mercilessly. It is sad to see, if you don't like it don't use it. Is it perfect? Of course it is not. Is it continually getting better? Absolutely and once they get layer effects and more bits per colour I will have every thing I want in an image manipulation program!!

So can someone please tell me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178848)

Can anyone tell me what makes GIMP "more competitive with Adobe Photoshop" by having a single window mode?

Re:So can someone please tell me (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179080)

Because they have this ludicrous notion in their head that if all they do is smash the floating windows into a single Window that Photoshop users will in droves flock to it. This is ignoring the lack of hardware acceleration, non-destructive layers, the high-bit depth support that is still lacking, etc. Not to mention the fact that the UI actually looks more hideous and cluttered now because they didn't do a proper redesign of the UI.

Or just get a Mac and buy Pixelmator... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37178860)

Sorry, but I have no faith that GIMP will ever be good enough for real productive work.
Comparing it to Photoshop is just some kind of sick joke.

For web developers who need something that works reliably and reasonably well with a good UI, they should just go out and buy a copy of Pixelmator. (I don't have any interest in the product other than being a happy user.) It let's me do those random little tweaks without jumping through hoops.

YES!!!!I (2)

csumpi (2258986) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178862)

This is a great step in the right direction. While I know the GIMP is far behind the current Photoshop in feature set, having a similar UI will encourage more users to give it a try. Even with the features of Photoshop years ago, the GIMP will be more useful with a decent UI than it is currently.

Just in time for GIMP to be prohibited at work! (3, Interesting)

eepok (545733) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178882)

Prior to graduating, I used GIMP because I couldn't afford Photoshop and didn't want to pirate it. When I started working for the university, I used it and Open Office specifically to show low/no-funding educational organizations that they don't need to spend thousands of dollars so their workers could edit documents and make beautiful images.

I continued to use it in different departments so the departments wouldn't have to spend the $200 university license fees.

In all these instances, I used GIMP portable either from a thumb drive or from the desktop. No installation because no one has permissions to install programs on their computers. A couple weeks ago, though, a new campus-wide update prohibited the launching of ANY exe not explicitly installed by an IT admin. I appealed and they said to buy and use photoshop. /sigh

Re:Just in time for GIMP to be prohibited at work! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37179106)

So you have to buy Photoshop, ask for the IT admin to install it for you, and... your story makes no sense.

Re:Just in time for GIMP to be prohibited at work! (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179192)

It appears from the grandparent comment that IT has a standing policy of installing Adobe® Photoshop® software for the price of one seat of a license for Adobe® Photoshop® software but not installing GIMP software at any price.

Tell dept heads that IT has been counterproductive (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179160)

A couple weeks ago, though, a new campus-wide update prohibited the launching of ANY exe not explicitly installed by an IT admin.

Then how do students and faculty in the computer science department test the programs that they're working on? Or are computer science courses at your university fully Dijkstra-style [wikipedia.org] courses done entirely on paper?

I appealed and they said to buy and use photoshop.

Have you tried making it known to the heads of all departments that IT's policy of declining to approve GIMP, which you have shown to be the least expensive program that fits the departments' requirements, is counterproductive to the university's mission?

Bad design choice (1)

sbrown123 (229895) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178886)

People wanted an MDI like Photoshop. Instead they get an SDI. It is almost as if the GIMP devs wanted to prove they could fail at even the simplest UI design choices.

Good design choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37179020)

MDI is a terrible UI. All modern software is moving away from it.

Photoshop's UI is pretty bad, and GIMP could easily do a dockable, SDI interface that would feel like Photoshop, but not be so dumb.

Re:Good design choice (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179156)

How was it even remotely a good design choice? The UI is cluttered, the drawing screen has so much of it's real estate taken up by the cluttered Windows and you still have to trawl through so many tabs and shit just to find options. This is not even getting to the fact that it still lacks proper hardware acceleration, proper nondestructive editing, proper high-bit depth support, a proper support for professional workflows, etc. Duh GIMP is still a piece of shit but now it's UI is worse than had they not done anything to it at all.

Re:Bad design choice (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179128)

That's because the developers are incompetent at UX design. When people were asking for a single-window mode they didn't just want all the windows that used to be floating to be smashed together into a cluttered mess. The UI is just fucking terrible.

Who was asking for it? (1)

Provocateur (133110) | more than 3 years ago | (#37178966)

I know, must be the same person who goes full screen on
EVERYTHING, even though he has a 24" screen to begin with. GIMP
makers can stop right there and call it a one-off, heck even
sell this on street corners, make it a really rare copy that you
can't even download on TOR.

Oooh, coffee's ready!

Re:Who was asking for it? (1)

freezin fat guy (713417) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179060)

From your post I am now realizing it was only one person. They turned down the wishes of the majority for only one person.

So I can answer your question. It was me.

My hang up (1)

dainbug (678555) | more than 3 years ago | (#37179034)

I've spent hours learning the gimp (unlearning photoshop). I still run into several barriers and run back . And yes some have to do with my favorite plugin, several have to do with how layers are handled and just ease of use. But, I'm very excited! because the multiple windows of the gimp was just a mess to work with.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?