Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
Hey, I was a GIMP convert even during the long dark ages of GIMP where you couldn't do any kind of bulk layer selection or moving or lots of maddening things... and you know what I kept fucking using it because it was always there for me, ready to help me make a shitty meme.
GIMP has recently gotten MUCH better though, it is a straight up beast now.
I was contemplating switching from Cinema4d to Blender for a long time, but the UX of C4d was so nice and Blender’s frankly sucked. Then 2.8 came out with a UI overhaul that changed all that and now I’d never dream of switching to another 3d package when Blender is so easy to use, extensible with Python, and has a huge community around it. Blender’s popularity soared after the UX changes. Sometimes, a UI overhaul can make all the difference.
Even where Blender falls short, there’s usually an addon that fills the gap, often paid, but still open source, which is 1000x better than competing options that almost always involve a subscription.
The benefit of a community of open source software around it also can’t be overstated. For instance, MakeHuman kicks ass, Auto-Rig Pro makes it usable for mocap and character animation, etc. Blender Studio’s projects like Flamenco render farm and automated Blender Studio pipeline built around the also open source Kitsu that I self-host are also amazing. Collectively, it all blows Autodesk out of the water and should be a shining example to all other open source projects.
No everything in Linux has to be used through the terminal, how else will I feel elite. If there has to be a gui let's make sure it looks like it was designed in 1995, so everyone hates it and just uses the terminal instead
Yall just use Krita if you want a photoshop replacement on Linux and then stop complaining about gimp please. Krita draws circles exactly like photoshop please just use Krita and leave the gimp people alone
I use both.
Krita is for drawing. GIMP is for making memes.
Downplaying the importance of UX is one of the reasons the year of the Linux desktop still has not arrived.
If by importance of UX you mean "your program should look and behave exactly like this other program made by a corpo, because I've learned that one already".
In reality The Year Of The Linux might never arrive, it doesn't have a multibillion corporation spending multi billions in order to make Linux a default software on every computer you buy. (to pedants: Android doesn't count)
No. Importance of UX simply means advance users can customize their workflow while making it easy to use for casual users.
Kinda like Krita or Blender. Both are not perfect, but the dev are working on it, together with the community.
Even GIMP dev also working on that, they have GIMP UX issue tracker here: https://gitlab.gnome.org/Teams/GIMP/Design/gimp-ux/
"your program should look and behave exactly like this other program made by a corpo, because I've learned that one already"
Oftentimes established workflow is already simple. There's no need to reinvent this from scratch. Example: Npainter and AzPainter are heavily inspired by PaintToolSAI. Inochi Creator is a clone (with unique feature) of Live2D Cubism.
I think the difference is with their software you can play around the UI and figure out things by intuition and trial and error
The same thing is not enough in FOSS in many cases. Like for ex, drawing solid shapes in GIMP
For three years I worked teaching computers to adults, and for four years I was a system administrator/helpdesk for a big office.
I can absolutely assure you, from my experience, there is nothing inheritly easier or harder to figure out in close source software vs foss, in windows vs linux, in gui vs console, in Photoshop vs Gimp.
The only difference is, what did a person encountered before. The idea that you can give a person photoshop and they will draw you a sold shape, but you give the same person gimp and they will not be able to never stood up to my experience with probably thousands of people.
The year of of the Linux happened long ago. However we fail to recognize it, because wasn't exactly what we were expecting. Most super computer is TOP500 as well as servers and majority of portable devices in the world are powered by the Linux kernel.
If the definition of Year of Linux was based on having astonishing UX then, this is probably something that will never happen.
We're talking about home computers, regular users running their personal OS.
Keycloak is a industry standard and is very much not vendor locked. Same with Auth0. As far as oauth goes.
Yeah I feel like "industry standard" and "vendor locked" are kinda opposites?
Not really. "Industry standard" just means it's commonly used in the industry. "Open specification" is the opposite of "vendor locked", e.g. OAuth for authentication.
Industry standard is generally an open standard. Proprietary is what you and meme/op are thinking.
No, sorry, you're just wrong. An "industry standard" can be anything that's normal in an industry, e.g. a particular tool. Photoshop for example is an industry standard, but it's not an open standard in any way.
Circle select + Shift-PaintBucket
People really love making storms out of water glasses.
For anyone thinking this is the solution, it's not. This technique produces a rasterized circle in a destructive editing workflow. What people that are complaining actually want, is a non-destructive tool, like the planned shape tool that will let everyone easily make vector shapes, like circles. It is part of the ongoing plan to add non-destructive workflows to GIMP, it's a game changer and the gimp team is doing great progress, so kudos to them.
Not an actual shape tools, as shape created should be editable (usually as vector layer).
That method resulting an rasterized circle.
...and GIMP dev actually planning to add shape tool.
and GIMP dev actually planning to add shape tool.
Gimp's first version released in 1998. Do you find it surprising that people aren't impressed by plans to add basic tools after nearly 30 years when the competition has stuff like content-aware filling and automatic layer separation?
There are many valid arguments against using Adobe products, or for using open source editing software. Productivity and ease of use are not one of them.
content-aware filling
For what it's worth, GIMP has had the resynthesizer plugin since the mid or late 2000's, and at the time it was significantly ahead of Adobe's Content Aware Fill.
It’s a free open source project, which means you’ve had just as long implement shapes.
Don’t like it then don’t use it, but you can hardly complain about something which is free.
Again with this tired excuse. "It's free therefore everybody should just accept subpar software".
You know what else is free? Gonorrhea. Doesn't mean it's something I should want, nor is anyone who isn't an STI researcher barred from saying it blows.
Just to be clear, I don't give a rat's ass what anyone uses to do their editing. Suit yourself. Just don't expect others to follow suit and sing the praises of a thing just because it's FOSS.
I would agree with this, but the whining about a missing feature and how long it’s been missing helps no one.
Either implement it yourself or move along ffs.
Regarding Shape Tool: this feature is dependant on Vector Layer. The earliest attempt to implement this is back in 2006: https://web.archive.org/web/20061219233008/http://lunarcrisis.pooq.com/wiki/Gimp/SoC2006Log
I recommend to check the discussion for Shape tool and Better vector Tool here: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/issues/11190
If you check Gitlab repository of GIMP, they're actually rewriting some old-codebase to be more future-proof. And that works really takes time. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/commits/master
A lot of major design software are actually doing this. For example:
You cannot just slap new feature continuously. The software will end bloated and slow like Photoshop.
All of that is irrelevant to an end user. They have the choice between tool A which is free but developing very slowly, or tool B which is paid but has all of the stuff they need.
99.99% will choose tool B and rightfully so.
Case in point: Serif isn't currently rewriting their old stuff, they already did 10 years ago. Affinity photo/designer/etc have been out for a decade.
It's not a standard until there's an ISO, RFC, IEEE or IEC number to go with it.
W3C