Skimming through that link, it sounds like the GIMP developer ran out patience with you, and became more snarky than necessary. However, it's hard to blame him. You come across as ridiculous in that thread, and now even more so digging it back up a month later in a completely separate thread.
I've said this before (kinda) and I'll say it again: if you're not happy with a feature in an open source piece of software then get involved with the development process: https://www.gimp.org/develop/ . If you don't know how and/or are not interested in learning then use another piece of software.
In that case please try to be polite at least. Your answers (in the linked conversation) really don't feel ok. Why not, maybe, think again and, maybe, apologize?
> if you're not happy with a feature in an open source piece of software then get involved with the development process
This is a red herring. There's no requirement to participate in a group in order to give criticism of it.
People often lack the time, skills, or political will power to change the direction of a open source software project.
Hilarious that you're bringing this up again.
Who cares if the feature wasn't developed for you, the whole program wasn't developed for you. In fact you've made it perfectly clear you don't even use gimp. You realize that they owe you absolutely nothing.
Hooray! GIMP is probably one of the top 5 pieces of software I think of when I'm in an evangelistic mood about open source. There's just something so beautiful about providing such easy access to creative tools.
I'm no power user, but I've found the GIMP to be satisfactory for 90% of my image editing requirements, and since I've spent most of my adult life as a rather destitute student, it's been an invaluable resource.
AFAIK homebrew-cask doesn't compile anything, it just downloads the dmg and copies the app for you so that you don't have to mount the dmg and drag the app bundle to your applications folder yourself.
They'll probably update their repository as soon as the GIMP devs release a 2.10 dmg (at which point you might as well download it yourself).
Download area (https://www.gimp.org/downloads/) lists both OSX and Windows builds as not available and in turn redirects Windows & OSX users to older builds pages, both of which are currently 404s. Be good to just go over these things in cursory sense before publicly announcing new release.
Nothing against the GIMP here, but I gave up on the Gimp about 10 years ago now waiting for it to support color depths greater than 8. Gimp was a great program back in 1998-ish. But the lack of deep color depth support really hampered it.
Actually Cinepaint was used for a quite a while in the movies where it served it's purpose rather well. There was a point in time where studios I believe were funding the development of it because commercial offerings at the time were poor.
The list of movies is listed on the Cinepaint wikipedia page, and I'm not sure that's all of them. It seems like the last movie listed was back in 2003.
As to why it's not more popular? I'm guessing because studios switched over to commercial offering once Adobe and other software houses got their act together, and provided software with more features and support than Cinepaint.
Photoshop seems to have had high bit depth editing for at least the last decade, and possibly longer.
This is update is incredible, it looks like a massive jump into modern relevancy. Excited to try it this weekend.
One thing I might have to raise in the GIMP community is what's the deal with sliders on brush-like tools? Very cumbersome to use by default, and I don't know if there's any way to change their behavior. Anyone have thoughts here?
Gimp has served me well. It has a lot of features for programmers who need to edit the input to programs. It will output images to ppm, allows you to combine layers with bitwise operations, and it can even export to a .c file with a const array of image data. It is such a precision tool and I love it.
Good to them finally giving UX a serious thought, as well as using multicore and adding flatpak installation method. At least opensource affocinados stand some semblance of chance in PS/LR holywar.
43 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 96.2 ms ] threadHis favorite reply to my criticism to GIMP's usability was "get a grip on yourself".
Love GIMP's devs entitlement to think GIMP's users are worthless pieces of crap.
It seems unlikely that I would be able to learn, too.
This is a red herring. There's no requirement to participate in a group in order to give criticism of it. People often lack the time, skills, or political will power to change the direction of a open source software project.
And yet they still want to criticize people who provide free software.
I'm no power user, but I've found the GIMP to be satisfactory for 90% of my image editing requirements, and since I've spent most of my adult life as a rather destitute student, it's been an invaluable resource.
Congrats to the GIMP team!
The download page says:
> There is no macOS package yet, sorry. Please check back later.
I tried the homebrew method but it installed v2.8 :(
They'll probably update their repository as soon as the GIMP devs release a 2.10 dmg (at which point you might as well download it yourself).
The list of movies is listed on the Cinepaint wikipedia page, and I'm not sure that's all of them. It seems like the last movie listed was back in 2003.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CinePaint
As to why it's not more popular? I'm guessing because studios switched over to commercial offering once Adobe and other software houses got their act together, and provided software with more features and support than Cinepaint.
Photoshop seems to have had high bit depth editing for at least the last decade, and possibly longer.
One thing I might have to raise in the GIMP community is what's the deal with sliders on brush-like tools? Very cumbersome to use by default, and I don't know if there's any way to change their behavior. Anyone have thoughts here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zigo9gTzL8