×

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!

First Looks at The Gimp 2.5

CmdrTaco posted about 6 years ago | from the like-a-fine-wine dept.

The Gimp 446

desmondhaynes writes "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, but that's just my two cents. On the other hand, version 2.5.0 of The GIMP includes some hot new features, like the integration of GEGL (Generic Graphics Library) which will finally get support for higher color depths, more colorspaces and eventually non-destructive editing."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

446 comments

ughhh (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062354)

I don't feel liike going to work.

First looks at gimp 2.5.... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062362)

First looks at gimp 2.5 vs photoshop flamewar coming at ya!

Re:First looks at gimp 2.5.... (4, Funny)

MightyYar (622222) | about 6 years ago | (#23062510)

Let me start it off :)

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, but that's just my two cents.
Now those users will know how the rest of us feel!

I kid... if it had 16-bit support I would use the Gimp since I don't care about CMYK.

Re:First looks at gimp 2.5.... (1)

twistedsymphony (956982) | about 6 years ago | (#23062658)

you kid but it's right on the money for me... I can't stand GIMP's interface (the old one at least) and it's the only reason I use paint.net instead of GIMP for quick and dirty photo manipulation. Of course I still prefer genuine Photoshop to both of them...

maybe the new interface will bring me back to GIMP... I'll have to download an find out.

Yay New Features (2)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 years ago | (#23062380)

With the rate of advancement in The GIMP, eventually, Photoshop enthusiasts will have nothing bad to really say about it. It was always about no cmyk, no 32 bit color support, no adjustment layers. It looks like some of these things may be coming in future.

Re:Yay New Features (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062398)

You forgot "no interface elements that aren't batshit insane."

Re:Yay New Features (5, Informative)

Coryoth (254751) | about 6 years ago | (#23062756)

You forgot "no interface elements that aren't batshit insane."
I'm curious; can you tell me some interface elements that are batshit insane, and explain why they are insane? Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to admit that GIMP has some interface quirks and problems around and about. Personally, however, I've found most things to work reasonably well, and, more importantly, to be steadily improving (the dockable palettes that showed up in 2.0 or so, and the Image Window + Tools Window shown in TFA for 2.5, etc.). That leaves me honestly curious as to what leads one to the point of view that apparently all the interface elements are insane -- so please: can you explain some of the things that bug you so much about the interface?

Re:Yay New Features (1)

Dekker3D (989692) | about 6 years ago | (#23063172)

i'm not him, so i don't know what he's talking about, but i know the separate-screen gui drove me away for years. i got fed up with downloading photoshop again and again though, so... i figured i'd just grin and bear with it. it hasn't crashed so far though, while photoshop does that sometimes, so i guess i should be grateful.

Re:Yay New Features (2, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 years ago | (#23063238)

My understanding is that the multi window interface is actually very similar to Photoshop on the MAC. Photoshop only has a single window MDI in windows. I could be wrong, but that's the way I understand it.

Re:Yay New Features (5, Informative)

MobyDisk (75490) | about 6 years ago | (#23063264)

The problem with GIMP is that the interface is so far gone, so weird, so bizarre, so non-standard - that it is really tough for anybody to sanely explain what's wrong with it. It's just so darn self evident.

Having not used it in 2 years, I'll try:
1) The multiple windows thing
I think this is the most often cited issue so I will list it first. GIMP opens multiple top-level windows which means that normal shortcuts and window navigation doesn't work. (Alt-tab on Windows -- apple-tab on Macs, etc.) The only way to use GIMP is to have multiple virtual desktops, which not everyone likes. The barrage of windows clutters the interface, and windows move around a lot because when you select new tools they resize or change. You can see through to the desktop which is distracting. I know at least on the Windows version, the keys that hide windows so you can get to your image don't really work right. Maybe my experience is skewed though because of the Windows and Mac ports. But IIRC, this same stuff happened on Linux.

This problem has garnered enough hate that there are several open-source projects that are either modifications to Photoshop, or programs that re-parent the window so that it behaves more normally. Unfortauntely, all of them are hacks and don't work super-well.

2) Unusual use of menus
- The menus are just... oddd. To a new user, the app is useless because once you open something, you get a window with no menus. After much frustration, the user monkey-clicks the mouse and realizes the menus are on the right-click instead of at the top of the window. That might not actually be a bad idea, but it is definitely counter-intuitive. Especially for "file" operations where people are used to seeing File-New/Open/Save/Save As/Close and those just aren't there.

This is not an issue for an advanced user, but it is strikingly odd to someone new, and it might force a lot of people to give-up right away.

3) Things that are NOT problems
- I'm browsing the comments and I see comments about Photoshop having an odd user-interface. I see comments that one particular tool or another doesn't work the way someone expects. I think these people are missing the point. The problems with GIMP aren't that some particular tool is not as easy to use as a Photoshop tool, or vice-versa. The problem is that nobody can even find the tool in GIMP because the overarching user-interface is so strange. Once people can get to the tool in the first place, then think about how the tool behaves.

4) Other
If you really want to know, this comes-up on Slashdot every 6 months or so. Probably some searching will come-up with obvious things I've completely forgotten over time.

Re:Yay New Features (5, Interesting)

Ford Prefect (8777) | about 6 years ago | (#23062834)

You forgot "no interface elements that aren't batshit insane."

Yeah, like changing a simple right-click on a layer, then 'Alpha to selection' to 'Select', 'Load Selection...', then selecting the appropriate document and channel from no-preview combo-boxes...

The GIMP's batshit insane, but Photoshop is as loopy as a teapot. Their particular modes of madness simply aren't entirely compatible - The GIMP is definitely pretty bad in places, but for the life of me I can't figure out how Photoshop is supposed to be infinitely superior from a user interface point of view.

I must admit that I still really like The GIMP's perspective correction tool - Photoshop's got better distortion tools, but they won't run backwards. Unlike the crop tool's perspective correction, which has no handy grid-lines visible. There's the lens correction filter, but that's really fiddly. But is brilliant at removing barrel distortion from texture references - something that's a real arse in The GIMP.

Drawing tools? I really like how the hold-shift-to-draw-a-straight-line works in The GIMP. Click somewhere, undo to remove that splodge, hold shift down and it'll preview a fine line from where you clicked to the current cursor position. Click somewhere, and it'll draw a line with the current drawing tool. Hold down control-shift, and it'll lock to particular angles.

Photoshop? Click, undo to remove that splodge, ARSE! it's forgotten where I clicked. Okay ... Leave that initial splodge, hold down shift, NO FINE PREVIEW LINE!, click somewhere, oops wrong place for that line, undo, ARSE AGAIN! it's forgotten where I wanted to draw the line from!

With Photoshop, it's really easy to set up guides for your simple, shadowy lines on yer textures - but I still like The GIMP's way of doing it.

Actually, The GIMP's handling of alpha channels is a bit more sensible - right up until the point it merrily decides to discard colour information from completely transparent pixels. As part of an 'optimisation', albeit one that only gets invoked with certain operations. So it's very easy to completely destroy your texture, unless you keep to a strict, undocumented set of operations.

Photoshop's alpha handling is plain weird in places, but it's a bit more predictable...

Re:Yay New Features (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062520)

With the rate of advancement in The GIMP, eventually, Photoshop enthusiasts will have nothing bad to really say about it.

You're right. It's only been 12+ years that people have been asking for those things. Now GIMP actually has an engine capable of doing them (note that it doesn't actually do them yet). It'll only be another few years until the basics are covered!

Re:Yay New Features (1)

davolfman (1245316) | about 6 years ago | (#23062758)

As those are features I use on pretty much every image I guess I won't be using it yet. Same with a pretty large portion of anybody else who scans film.

Re:Yay New Features (3, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | about 6 years ago | (#23062950)

As those are features I use on pretty much every image I guess I won't be using it yet. Same with a pretty large portion of anybody else who scans film.

You might want to try CinePaint (formerly called Film Gimp). It is a fork of Gimp aimed specifically at touching up frames of film. It supports 8, 16, and 32 bit color, CMYK, HDR, Onion skinning, etc.

It is mainly developed by film production, special effects companies and has been used on many major motion pictures (Harry Potter, Spider Man, etc.).

It may well be more what you're looking for if you're working with film images.

Re:Yay New Features (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 years ago | (#23062786)

Yes, it hasn't caught up yet, but I think that eventually, it will. And then what? Do you think that people will continue to pay for Photoshop once GIMP does everything Photoshop does? Sure, some will, but a lot won't. And also, have people been asking for 16 bit per channel color and adjustment layers for 12 years? I highly doubt it.

Re:Yay New Features (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063056)

I think people will continue to pirate Photoshop and businesses will continue to pay for it. Pretty much the same way it is now. The GIMP is never going to become mainstream unless they completely redo the user interface.

Re:Yay New Features (1)

stubear (130454) | about 6 years ago | (#23063064)

By the time GIMP catches up with Photoshop, Adobe will have added new improvements for GIMP to ape and the cycle will start all over. GIMP will NEVER be as good as Photoshop for professional use.

Re:Yay New Features (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063276)

You act as if Photoshop is a non-moving target. The features that you're talking about up there were available in Photoshop 3. We're up to what, version 9 now? And each version adds features that are actually useful if you use the program professionally.

Re:Yay New Features (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063184)

Adobe's marketing department, a.k.a. Photoshop Enthusiasts, will never get done bashing the GIMP. As long as the GIMP is "not" Photoshop, it will be unsuitable for serious or professional use. End of story.

I wish they'd drop GTK+. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063234)

I wish they'd drop GTK+ and move to Qt, wxWidgets or one of the other real GUI toolkits. I know that they were the original developers of GTK+, but they'd gain so much by moving to Qt.

Qt, especially Qt 4.x, is a much better platform for portable, large-scale software development. And their recent graphics-related advances would no doubt be very useful for GIMP.

The Windows and Mac OS X ports of GTK+ are, to put it kindly, utter crap. When using GTK+ apps on OS X, even with a Mac OS X theme, there's a horizontal menu across each window. That's just not how it's done on Mac OS X. With Qt apps, on the other hand, it's almost impossible to tell them apart from Cocoa-based Mac OS X apps.

GTK+ harks to a time when Motif was the dominant UI toolkit on UNIX systems. Thankfully, those days are long dead. It's time for the GIMP developers to get with the times.

Re:Yay New Features (1)

teslatug (543527) | about 6 years ago | (#23063220)

At what rate? I don't see that the new release does much in that regard. There is still no CMYK or 32bit support as far as I can tell from the article.

Jam Tomorrow (2, Insightful)

allcar (1111567) | about 6 years ago | (#23062424)

This feels like one of those releases that will be exciting for the developers, but largely irrelevant to the end users. Hopefully, it will lay the foundations for future releases to have exciting new features and capabilities, but for now there seems little to shout about.
Reminds me of KDE4.

Re:Jam Tomorrow (2, Informative)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | about 6 years ago | (#23062534)

Well, 2.50 is the first development release, there's going to be a ton more (2.3 had over 20 iirc) so we'll see it take shape in the coming months or years. 2.4 was in development for quite a while, so I'd say 2.6 (the final stable version of 2.5) won't be here for quite a while, and it that time it could well be a very important release to end users. This version will probably feature some GUI reworking, which is definitely welcome considering how a lot of people seem to complain about the UI. Personally, the change in this development version seems to be for the worse (according to the description from the picture), but then it will probably be unrecognizable from these pictures by the time the final version comes around.

Re:Jam Tomorrow (5, Informative)

tpwch (748980) | about 6 years ago | (#23062550)

Wrong. Finally getting higher than 8-bit depth is great news for anyone who does more than a bit of hobby work with the gimp.

To take myself as an example I take photos with a digital camera that gives me RAW files. Those are 12-bit files, which means 4096 colors per pixel rather than the 256 you get with 8 bit. Now I will be able to edit those in the gimp without loosing any quality, which means alot less posterisation when adjusting contrast and settings like that. The output image will simply look alot better, with the same tools that we already have in the gimp (assuming that the input image is of good quality of course).

Re:Jam Tomorrow (5, Informative)

simcop2387 (703011) | about 6 years ago | (#23062992)

To take myself as an example I take photos with a digital camera that gives me RAW files. Those are 12-bit files, which means 4096 colors per pixel rather than the 256 you get with 8 bit.
just to be pedantic, i doubt you're raw files are actually 12bit per pixel, its most probably 12bit per channel per pixel (and in the case of the gimp it was a maximum of 8bit per channel per pixel). this gives you 12bits * 3 channels (assuming RGB here) per pixel, so its a 2^36 colors (68,719,476,736 ) instead of 2^24 colors (16,777,216). still a dramatic change, but i just figured it'd be nice to have the complete numbers there :)

Re:Jam Tomorrow (1)

Ford Prefect (8777) | about 6 years ago | (#23063222)

Actually, if his camera has a Bayer filter over the image sensor, they quite probably are 12 bits per pixel - they're interpolated to something more appropriately RGB afterwards. Until then, they're just red OR green OR blue. Not a combination!

If you're loading raw files into the GIMP, they go through the not-half-bad UFRaw loader. I'm not sure what sort of precision that uses internally, but it's pretty high - on a par with Photoshop's raw loader. Correct the basic contrast and curves in the loader, then it'll be way closer to what's needed when downsampling to 8-bits-per-channel. If you still get banding problems after that, then either your camera suffers from no noise whatsoever, or your photo's stuffed and you need to take a new one. Learn how to use a camera?

(I have had pretty nasty banding effects in some images I was editing due to the GIMP's eight-bit limitations - but these where some pretty borderline cases involving very smooth gradients in skies generated in Terragen [planetside.co.uk]. Personally, I'm looking forwards to being able to create some proper, HDR skyboxes with Photoshop - but 32-bits-per-channel colour is a bit ridiculous otherwise... ;-) )

Re:Jam Tomorrow (1)

cloricus (691063) | about 6 years ago | (#23062616)

The 'complete failure (to do anything but convince users that 3.5.x was a good release)' part or the 'took a lot longer than we said and still isn't remotely stable or all that usable' part?

Heh, I can't even be marked a troll, it's all true.

Have they changed the name yet? (5, Insightful)

Eevee (535658) | about 6 years ago | (#23062458)

I realize that marketing has nothing to do with the features or performance of a program. But it does have a factor in acceptance at work. There's no way I'm going in front of our Engineering Review Board for a product called "The Gimp", no matter how much money it's going to save.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (5, Informative)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | about 6 years ago | (#23062500)

So call it the "GNU Image Manipulation Program" around your bosses.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1)

Artuir (1226648) | about 6 years ago | (#23062722)

Or, you know, the software developers could change the name to something that isn't retarded. If you're going to be referring to the product multiple times in a speech, don't you think that would be a bit tiresome to say repeatedly?

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1)

KGIII (973947) | about 6 years ago | (#23062808)

If they don't know what GIMP is they probably won't know what GNU is either and that's a lot of explaining that you'll have to do. Most of the bosses I've worked for don't have the capacity for such high level thinking. Thinking "outside the box" is just a turn of phrase (in my experience) which is tantamount to an "open door policy." Going to your bosses with GIMP, taking the four hours to then describe what GNU is, then explaining the reality of opensource, and finally trying to convince them that there are better ways to spend their money other than licensing some software will likely result in you finding out about their "open door policy." (Meaning they'll open the door so that you can leave.)

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062954)

So call it the "GNU Image Manipulation Program" around your bosses.

Which then provokes the following conversation:

Boss: What's guh-noo?
Geek: It stands for GNU's not Unix
Boss: What's not Unix?
Geek: GNU's not Unix
Boss: What's not Unix?

And then you could all sit down and have the requisite discussion about mathematical recursion, how it applies to this situation and everyone could have a good laugh.

Honestly - as much as I applaud RMS and everything that he's done, he made a mistake here and needs to fix it instead of remaining pedantic about it. I used to be quite pedantic about the difference between "linux" the kernel and "free, open source software" but I have become much more pragmatic about the situation: don't make people think so much.

When people see that I'm not running Windows on my PC, they ask what it is and I tell 'em it is linux. If I even try to get into explaining it beyond that, they glaze over and I have lost them. That said, FOSS is in need of a huge marketing makeover and GIMP's name is a huge part of this.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (3, Interesting)

piojo (995934) | about 6 years ago | (#23062560)

I've heard a lot of people complain about this. Why doesn't someone make a friendly fork, that essentially mirrors the source, but calls the project by any name other than "GIMP"? (Agreeing on such a name could be a start.) I hope this wouldn't piss off the developers, but it seems like it would be so easy to implement. It would be easy to install, especially if it got some support from the GIMP developers. Would devs be friendly to this idea? What would we call it?

The package formerly known as Film GIMP (0)

tepples (727027) | about 6 years ago | (#23062666)

Why doesn't someone make a friendly fork, that essentially mirrors the source, but calls the project by any name other than "GIMP"? (Agreeing on such a name could be a start.)
One such fork from the GIMP 1.x codebase was called CinePaint [wikipedia.org].

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062724)

What would we call it?
I nominate "Fetish Slave Guy In Zippered Mask And Assless Chaps."

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1)

ThogScully (589935) | about 6 years ago | (#23062766)

It worked for Iceweasel, I suppose. But I'm guessing that adds more confusion than anything else. And that probably pissed of a few people too. I'd think it's just better to call it by it's real full name and not the acronym.
-N

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (2, Funny)

Millennium (2451) | about 6 years ago | (#23062796)

I nominate "Rose," because what's in a name? That which we call The GIMP by any other word would smell as sweet.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (3, Interesting)

jellomizer (103300) | about 6 years ago | (#23062998)

Open Image Studio is my vote for a name. Or just Image Studio. There is no need to past Open or GNU everywhere. as most people really don't care just as long as it is free as in beer.

You are free to call it anything you want (3, Funny)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 6 years ago | (#23063010)

It is GPL. You can doewnload it and change the name to anything you want.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063048)

What would we call it?

How about something like... Cropping, Rendering, and Alphas Program?

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (5, Funny)

domatic (1128127) | about 6 years ago | (#23063104)

Allow me to humbly advance some ideas:

Professional Image Manipulation Program
Simple Image Manipulation Program
Lightmap Image Manipulation Program
Windowed Image Manipulation Program

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1)

explosivejared (1186049) | about 6 years ago | (#23062590)

Dude, they have marketing in mind. Just in stead of going for silicon valley, well, they are targeting the strategic market of silicone valley. Think about it, of the two, which has a larger mindshare.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062598)

Whenever I have to describe GIMP to the unenlightened.. I just call it:

"The GNU Image Manipulation Program" .. much more appetizing to people used to marketing department generated product names.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063240)

"Have you heard of the GNU Image Manipulation Program?"
"No, what's its name?"
"... The GNU Image Manipulation Program?"
"It's so new it doesn't have a name yet?"
"We call it GI^H^H Voight-Kampff for short."
"Neat!"

yeah right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062640)


As if they didn't like an operative system called "Leopard".

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1, Troll)

drooling-dog (189103) | about 6 years ago | (#23062656)

There's no way I'm going in front of our Engineering Review Board for a product called "The Gimp", no matter how much money it's going to save.
Your engineering board should make it explicit that a fashionable name trumps functionality and cost-effectiveness when it comes to software procurement. In fact, I dare them to.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062682)

Same here. In fact, I never use Yahoo.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1)

NoGenius (976447) | about 6 years ago | (#23062696)

I couldn't agree more. Names are important (just ask the folks at Canonical i.e Ubuntu), and this name is a turn off.

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (1)

Ed Avis (5917) | about 6 years ago | (#23062740)

Could you explain what you find objectionable about the name?

Would your engineering review board also have a problem with the name of the program? Or would they politely pretend not to notice and approve it with a straight face?

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062746)

I wanted to call it the Natural Image General Generating Enhanced Reimager but folks didn't like that either. Go figure!

Re:Have they changed the name yet? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062976)

Do you snicker at the word "penis" too?

It's called GIMP. Not "The" GIMP, not "A" GIMP, just GIMP. Get over it. I'm sure they don't even blink when you toss out gibberish like Unbuntu and Vista at them. And I'm sure someone will be more than willing to take your place when you Engineering Review Board replaces you for costing them a fuckload of money on Photoshop when your reason not saving money is "because it's called The GIMP".

No really, grow the fuck up.

How long... (1)

bhunachchicken (834243) | about 6 years ago | (#23062464)

... before the MDI argument kicks off? ;)

Re:How long... (1)

Ford Prefect (8777) | about 6 years ago | (#23062568)

... before the MDI argument kicks off? ;)

From the release notes: "With the help of the UI team, the Toolbox menu has been merged into the image window. GIMP now always keeps an image window open and the default configuration treats the toolbox and docks as utility windows."

Well, they're doing something about it - although I much preferred the previous way of doing things. It was almost RISC OS-like in its simplicity - context-sensitive menus only! ;-)

As for the article linked by Slashdot, was it just me who got a noisy advert? I heard my earphones muttering about some sort of business opportunities while they were sat on the desk...

Re:How long... (2, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | about 6 years ago | (#23062600)

... before the MDI argument kicks off? ;)

You need to be more patient, first we're going to discuss CMYK.

Once we're done with that we'll look at your MFI problem...

You *know* it hasn't noticeably improved when... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062466)

...the very first item in the list of "noteworthy" improvements is a new splash screen. :'(

Re:You *know* it hasn't noticeably improved when.. (4, Informative)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | about 6 years ago | (#23062554)

Yep. My first thought exactly. You know the guy doing the writeup/review really has no clue about the GIMP's shortcomings when he touts a new splashscreen as an exciting improvement.

Re:You *know* it hasn't noticeably improved when.. (5, Informative)

Coryoth (254751) | about 6 years ago | (#23062824)

...the very first item in the list of "noteworthy" improvements is a new splash screen. :'(
It's a development release. The odd numbered releases (2.1, 2.3, 2.5) are all unstable development releases when new features are integrated in. Usually there are around 20 such development releases (i.e., we got to around 2.3.20 before 2.4 was finally released). In this case we have 2.5.0 -- the very first development release, with just the beginnings to structural changes to integrate new functionality. In this case that means enough behind the scenes work to get GEGL working, and the beginnings of an apparent UI overhaul. Expect another 20 or so releases each adding more improvements before you get the next stable release: 2.6.0.

Re:You *know* it hasn't noticeably improved when.. (1)

Millennium (2451) | about 6 years ago | (#23062900)

Well, this is the first development release. Do you honestly expect it to already be feature-complete when the work is only just starting?

Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1, Insightful)

MeditationSensation (1121241) | about 6 years ago | (#23062504)

I mean, jeezus, mspaint can make shapes. GIMP can't. It's ridiculous. I'm using Paint.NET on Windows for my web comic for now.

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1)

neumayr (819083) | about 6 years ago | (#23062570)

Yeah well, it can. But it seems it isn't the right tool for what you're trying to do.
You might want to try some vector drawing tool, like Inkscape.

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | about 6 years ago | (#23062692)

I'm sure it would be hard to dump Paint.NET. It's the third least bloated piece of software I've ever seen. The second if Irfanview, of course, which is the best image viewer on any platform and has been since the 90s, and the first is mars.exe, that voxel-based 3-d "Martian surface" demo from the mid-90s that was like 4 kilobytes (http://www.whisqu.se/per/docs/math37.htm).

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1)

jim.hansson (1181963) | about 6 years ago | (#23062870)

The second if Irfanview, of course, which is the best image viewer on any platform and has been since the 90s
please give the URL were I can download irfanview for Linux, BSD and beos

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063012)

please give the URL were I can download irfanview for Linux, BSD and beos

Apparently it works in Linux under Wine (don't know how well though...).

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about 6 years ago | (#23063228)

Irfanview runs on Wine (although using a custom toolbar skin crashes it, so don't). However it runs a bit slower than on Windows if you use it to page through image-heavy folders.

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062886)

'm sure it would be hard to dump Paint.NET. It's the third least bloated piece of software I've ever seen.

Only if you already have the .NET framework installed.

Offtopic Mars.exe was Re:Meh. Can it make ... (1)

vic-traill (1038742) | about 6 years ago | (#23062936)

mars.exe, that voxel-based 3-d "Martian surface" demo from the mid-90s that was like 4 kilobytes

Thanks Colonel. I'd forgotten about this gem - had to go snag it just now to remind myself. Tim Clarke's description of the method he used in this demo of a Martian terrain can be found in the thread at http://www.whisqu.se/per/docs/math37.htm [whisqu.se] .

Well worth a few minutes reading. And the bonus of a Catch-22 reference in the parent post to boot!

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about 6 years ago | (#23063254)

that voxel-based 3-d "Martian surface" demo from the mid-90s that was like 4 kilobytes (http://www.whisqu.se/per/docs/math37.htm).
If you want to see more for less, check out these [theprodukkt.com]. Check out .kkrieger [theprodukkt.com] and .debris [theprodukkt.com] especially.

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 6 years ago | (#23062726)

If you want to add shapes to a raster image, try making a selection in the desired shape and then doing Edit > Fill or Edit > Stroke. Useful selection tools for this include the box tool (press r), the oval tool (press e), and the path tool for polygons and Bezier shapes (press b).

Re:Meh. Can it make circles and squares? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062738)

Jeezus, Photoshop cant make shapes. It's Recidivous!

OMG! The wrong tool for the job is not working!

Why wont this screwdriver pound in nails!!!!

Useless article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062524)

Not much of an article at all, no content to speak of and a handful of screenshots. I'll save others the trouble of reading it:
  1. The menu which on stable version is duplicated in both the toolbar and image windows will exist only in image windows.
  2. Gimp has finally switched to GEGL which means we get support for higher bit depths (stable is limited to 8 bits/channel).

too little... way way too late (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062548)

Gimp the very epitome of uber bad interface design:

just look at the screenshots: a popup box with scroll bars top and bottom.
A dialog box with Help Reset Cancel and OK all next to each other.
The toolbox is overloaded with 37 items.
Every element seems to be create a new item on your taskbar.

Powerful it maybe be... but a poorly designed interface will always negate any power in an application.

It's kinda sad that the leading graphics package on linux still looks like a linux app from 10 years ago, when everything else in linux has made great strides in usability.

Ad trap (4, Insightful)

Zebedeu (739988) | about 6 years ago | (#23062564)

Wow, that's a bad review!

One can tell that from his very first comment (on the splash screen):

HOT new splash
But probably this is just a temporary one, as the final version will have a totally different splash!
Really? You mean the splash screen is a HOT new feature? And you say it will "probably" change on the final version? Amazing!

Then it just goes downhill from there, ending with a description of what The Gimp is.
Thanks, I didn't know what it was before, now I have to read your crappy review once again so it makes sense.

At least there were no shortage of ads, which surprisingly got through my AdBlock Plus.

BAD ADBLOCK! BAD!

Re:Ad trap (1)

waa (159514) | about 6 years ago | (#23062968)

At least there were no shortage of ads, which surprisingly got through my AdBlock Plus.
Mine too for some strange reason. And the number of cookies I had to decline was practically unbelievable. I counted somewhere around 20!
This empty "article" was nothing more than a pathetic attempt at driving up ad views and installing tracking cookies.
But you have to admit, the new GIMP splash screen is HOT! (sigh)

Appauling (5, Informative)

Stuidge (1104439) | about 6 years ago | (#23062578)

This is a word for word, picture for picture copy of the original at Softpedia [softpedia.com] (I'm guessing, as the Softpedia article was posted 4 days earlier). The article linked is full of adverts as well. You would be better off reading the offical GIMP release notes [gimp.org].

Re:Appauling (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062730)

I find your spelling appalling as well.

No, but seriously, that's sad.

Malware (5, Informative)

pelago (957767) | about 6 years ago | (#23062582)

Hmm, I'm getting malware popups from 'trustedbrowser.com' from the site in TFA.

Re:Malware (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063252)

It keeps popping up an unprocessed ASP page and auto-forwards me to a horse accessories site after a few seconds hmmm....

The Project Leaders need a boot up the... (1)

distantbody (852269) | about 6 years ago | (#23062592)

Why is The Gimp still the 'fairly decent pile of code, hampered only by its UI'?. To The GIMP Development Team: Please show some respect to the contributers and hire a UI designer before 3.0.

--Feature Creep: just say NO--

Single window, please? (4, Insightful)

MMC Monster (602931) | about 6 years ago | (#23062624)

Forget changing the name. In the list of requests for 2.8, the number one request is a single window model.

This is likely the number one request for s number of years, yet we have to wait until 2.8 to even see if it will happen?

The Gimp is a nice tool, but it really should listen to it's users.

Re:Single window, please? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062948)

This is also one of my biggest complaints about gimp. I solved it using xnest.

http://xubuntu.wordpress.com/2006/09/05/howto-run-gimp-in-one-window/

It... uh. sort of solves the problem? Kind of? It's a bit better anyway.

Re:Single window, please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23063148)

Sounds to me like the problem is your window manager. MDI is effectively dead; it's window managers not applications that should be responsible for managing windows. If you're stuck on MS Windows try replacing the bloated default shell with something better and faster. [bb4win.org]

PS: It's always [guidebookgallery.org] been done like this! [sourceforge.net]

polygonal selection (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062638)

By public demand, a simple polygonal selection tool was added in this release.
Its about fscking time! Now I think I might actually be able to use it for more than 5 minutes at a time without getting completely frustrated and going back to photoshop...

Solen content!!! (5, Informative)

theempire (1272824) | about 6 years ago | (#23062760)

Dear Slashdot admin, be aware that the current article (http://techrunch.blogspot.com/2008/04/first-look-gimp-250.html) was completely stolen from Softpedia (http://news.softpedia.com/news/First-Look-The-GIMP-2-5-0-83090.shtml) which was posted, as Stuidge said above, 4 days ago....

USA Survey Group?! (1)

Mr Z (6791) | about 6 years ago | (#23062872)

Am I the only person who keeps having this page redirected to "USA Survey Group" after about 20 - 30 seconds? Looks like it's not just stolen content, but stolen content wrapped around dubious revenue generation.

What we REALLY want... (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about 6 years ago | (#23062836)

... is a Liquify-like tool to make our girlfriends' boobs look bigger to show off on Facebook.
 
Oh, that and the "celebrity toe" underwear-removal tool.

GIMP sucks balls on Windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062928)

GIMP's a piece of crap! If you want any serious work done, get Paintshop Pro. The money ($59.99 on ebay for a used copy) spent is worth the time and effort saved.

SPAM BLOG (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#23062984)

WHY is /. linking to a spam blog. look at the name for pete's sake. here's the original: http://news.softpedia.com/news/First-Look-The-GIMP-2-5-0-83090.shtml [softpedia.com]

The blog is just a giant redirect. Way to editorially review, slashdot. I'm on IE here at work, but Opera kills the scripting on this blog at home. forbid anyone the other way around reads this article.

How to make gimp ui good in no time! (1)

morphles (1257124) | about 6 years ago | (#23063018)

First can someone explain me why they don't like the name? Whats so bad about it?(Maybe because im not native English speaker i don't "sense" something?) And you can always use the long name...

Then some people say it's UI is bad uncomfortable etc etc. But i would say gimp's ui is really really not bad. And i have a good guess why other don't like it: it has many windows. So you go why the f* you need so many windows? to place everything the way i want, i can even detach menus(photoshop can't do this for sure) and this is great feature (i know its from gtk actually). Now to those who say it has too many windows, may i ask: do you know what window manager is? I totally agree working with gimp in windows can be annoying, but thats the case with almost all apps on windows(then you get a bit more windows in your desktop). organizing windows in windows is almost impossible (kinda funny isn't it). But if you have wm with virtual desktops and give one for gimp it becomes really comfortable to use. (many apps also) Also some wm have such unheard features like window grouping and shading and other nice features, witch add usability to many apps.

Sorry to wander from gimp to wm's but i just think that some people blame not the things tha should be blamed.

PS i also think blenders ui is amazing too, very configurable, ant thats not a bed thing, almost always.

Excited about GEGL (5, Interesting)

radarsat1 (786772) | about 6 years ago | (#23063024)

Yes, this is great. Forget the bad / stolen / whatever review, a look at the product..

I've been looking forward to them integrating GEGL for some time now, and it looks like they've finally done it. This is going to be the single best thing to happen to open-source image manipulation in a long time.

GEGL will take care of almost all the current complaints from image professionals related to image bit depths, printing features, etc. It'll make layering effects much easier to apply and it makes everything related to image manipulation completely modular.

Also, think about how REALLY nice it is that the image manipulations routines are now librarified (is that a word?)... It means that we'll likely see other new applications pop up here and there taking advantage of this nicely-designed back-end. So don't worry about the lack of changes to the GUI, this will come in time, and even the GUI-related complaints (though I don't understand them) will likely be eventually moot.

I think it's great that they've finally achieved this long sought-after goal of redesigning the GIMP back-end and integrating it into the application. We should all be very excited about this! I use the GIMP all the time for my (non-professional) needs, and it's an amazing piece of software.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...