Have any of you actually used gimp?

[Chess]

Back to the subject of the Gimp: the one photoshop feature that I can't seem to replicate in the Gimp is slices. I believe there is a plugin that sorta-kinda works, but is there any way to easily slice an image like photoshop?

[Judland]

Hmmm... "slices". I never heard of that before. Sounds interesting. Time for some "googling".

UPDATE:

I found THIS tutorial regarding GIMP and "slicing". Yes, there is a plug-in called Py-Slice to do the slicing up of an image for a web page. The tutorial talks about using it.
[/url]

[Judland]

I never said once I use or like photoshop. My point is that it shouldn't take 7 steps to do something you can do 1 step in even the crappiest drawing program (MS paint, kpaint). I only referenced photoshop b/c the gimp is often heralded as the photoshop alternative.

My apologies. I guess to me it just seemed to be implied.

[CptnObvious999]

I know some people that have problems with the GIMPs interface, myself included sometimes. For one of them the GIMP was one of the first open source apps they have used and they have already attached a bad name to open source because of the GIMP. I look forward to telling people about Krita when KOffice is for Windows although in a fairness Krita could use a little bit of usability fixes and some more features.

[snarkout]

I'd have to say that the gimp is pretty damn bad, interfacewise. I used to use it all the time after I forced myself to learn it. A month or so ago I tried to do some stuff in it again, and seriously couldn't remember how to do half of the stuff I was trying to do, none of which was complex. I ended up using fireworks on my wife's mac - took about 3 minutes.

[Judland]

Ah well, I use GIMP on a daily basis (or pretty darn close too it) so I'm quite comfortable using it and know my way around it pretty good to get done what I need to do.

I suppose I think of computer software as tools. A table saw in the hands of a user who's unfamiliar with it can do more harm than good, too.

[hellonorman]

Ah well, I use GIMP on a daily basis (or pretty darn close too it) so I'm quite comfortable using it and know my way around it pretty good to get done what I need to do.

I suppose I think of computer software as tools. A table saw in the hands of a user who's unfamiliar with it can do more harm than good, too.

To follow the table saw analogy you seem to be saying that you can take your circular saw, some sawhorses, c clamps, a level and all the time it takes to set that up and cut just as good of a straight line in a 2x4.

There's a difference between being unhappy with the functionality and bashing because its free. Many many people would like the gimp to be a photoshop replacement but are unhappy with the interface. Yet the gimp camp seems to revel in it.

[Judland]

To follow the table saw analogy you seem to be saying that you can take your circular saw, some sawhorses, c clamps, a level and all the time it takes to set that up and cut just as good of a straight line in a 2x4.

Sure. And for people who don't like using a table saw or can't afford a table saw, then that's a perfectly acceptable solution. But with this set-up you can still muck things up pretty good if you don't take the time to learn how to use these tools properly.

Many many people would like the gimp to be a photoshop replacement but are unhappy with the interface. Yet the gimp camp seems to revel in it.

If that makes you feel better, then okay.

It works well for me and I've learned how to use it. If a different interface was made for it, I suppose I'd just learn how to use that, too. Not a real big deal for me.

The original post of this thread was making a point to say that GIMP was "unacceptably difficult". I'm just simply disagreeing with that opinion.

[hellonorman]

It's not acceptable for almost anyone who would have to cut straight lines in 2x4's on a regular basis. Perhaps you are the exception that makes the rule.

No it doesn't make me feel better I'm not sure why you would think so.

[dann]

See, I am with Judland on this. I am fine with the Gimp's interface. When I go into Photoshop or Fireworks, I am extremely frustrated. To me, that layout is clunky and difficult. Why is that? Probably because I learned how to use a photo manipulation application by using the Gimp. I started with the Gimp and have attempted to play around with alternatives. For me, those alternatives just don't cut it.

If we compare the Gimp's interface with Photoshop we do immediately realize there is a significant difference. These differences are not insurmountable. I mean; if I can learn to use Photoshop then someone else can learn to use the Gimp. The problem is will one take the time? Probably not. They will immediately complain it is not what they are used to.

If you are more comfortable using Photoshop, then do that. Gimp is not photoshop. It's a similar type application but not the same. We cannot apologize that Photoshop is unavailable under Linux, that's Adobe's problem. Nor should we apologize for the Gimp's interface. If it is that much of a barrier don't use it. There are other options, as pointed out above.

I'm not saying that the Gimp's interface is the best possible interface out there. I suspect that the core developers of the gimp did not do useablility studies when the first began designing the Gimp interface. But now that the project has significantly matured; and has a solid userbase comfortable with the interface; it's all that more difficult to expect a change.

That's almost like me expecting Photoshop to design their interface to be more like the Gimp because that is what I am comfortable with.

[hellonorman]

The problem is will one take the time? Probably not.

Exactly. It would be one thing if the gimp interface was somehow better. If people won't use your program because of it's interface, regardless of the reason, wouldn't it make sense to rethink it? Nobody praises the gimp interface they just talk of how they got used to it. It's rather like living on a farm and getting used to the smell of pig shit to the point that it doesn't bother you anymore.

You can't at this point just ignore that many interface conventions and standards have been set by the dominant OS in the world today. If your interface is just different to be different and not because it's better or revolutionary than you're just shooting yourself in the foot.

Your statements also seem to be based on the premise that the PS and gimp interfaces are just different. I'm not sure I agree. Surely Adobe has done some research into the usability and as you say the gimp probably did not.

Anyway I am really far away from what my main point in posting to this thread was. You can't win people over to Linux and Open Source by telling them that the seven step process that should only take one step is no big deal.

[TankCatNinjaFish]

The thing is, I'm not more comfortable with photoshop. I've only used it a few dozen times screwing around on my friend's Windows box. So my complaint isn't that gimp isn't like photoshop.

My complain is that gimp's UI is illogical and unintuitive. Compare it with Inkscape, which I didn't even know existed til yesterday: inkscape was the first vector graphics app I've ever used, but I immediately knew what most of the buttons were and I was up&running in no time. I was even doing fancy crap after an hour or so. Compare that to gimp's sadistic interface. Shift+Pencil = Line? Filled box - smaller filled box of different color = rectangle? Python Fu? Meaninglessly cluttered windows? And there's no red-eye remover?

[CptnObvious999]

The thing is, I'm not more comfortable with photoshop. I've only used it a few dozen times screwing around on my friend's Windows box. So my complaint isn't that gimp isn't like photoshop.

My complain is that gimp's UI is illogical and unintuitive. Compare it with Inkscape, which I didn't even know existed til yesterday: inkscape was the first vector graphics app I've ever used, but I immediately knew what most of the buttons were and I was up&running in no time. I was even doing fancy crap after an hour or so. Compare that to gimp's sadistic interface. Shift+Pencil = Line? Filled box - smaller filled box of different color = rectangle? Python Fu? Meaninglessly cluttered windows? And there's no red-eye remover?

I agree, and working with 3 windows just to edit a photo is a little much, that's why I like Krita or Inkscape better.

http://www.openusability.org/forum/foru ... rum_id=974.
It looks like the OpenUsability people are doing something interesting with GIMP. If they can do to GIMP what they did to Kuroo we are all saved!

[jsusanka]

Ah well, I use GIMP on a daily basis (or pretty darn close too it) so I'm quite comfortable using it and know my way around it pretty good to get done what I need to do.

I suppose I think of computer software as tools. A table saw in the hands of a user who's unfamiliar with it can do more harm than good, too.

totally agree - I am use to the gimp interface too and it is excellent at what I use it for.
I am quite comfortable with the interface.

[Vogateer]

I believe that complicated tasks, like complex photo manipulation that goes beyond red eye reduction and brightness/contrast, will never have an "intuitive" interface. I'm like a few of the people here who learned Gimp first, and I have a hard time getting anything done in Photoshop. I don't complain that Photoshop has a terrible interface, though, because I believe that you just have to learn interfaces for complicated programs.

I probably never will learn how to use Photoshop, simply because I'm so accustomed to the Gimp, and it does what I want on both Linux and OS X at work. I imagine people feel the same way when they're coming from Photoshop; they don't want to learn a different way to do the manipulations they can already do in Photoshop, just so they can use a different program. I don't blame them, because I think Photoshop is damned complicated and if I had spent that much time learning how to use such a program, I wouldn't want to change, either. But the fact that people had to invest that much time --and that much money in courses, usually--to learn Photoshop basically tells me that Photoshop is not intuitive, either. I certainly wouldn't say that the Gimp is intuitive, and it probably could be improved, but then again, there is absolutely nothing intuitive about bash for that matter, but you learn it, because it's damned useful and worth the effort.

To say that the Gimp's interface is "unacceptably difficult" is extreme. I spent time reading some tutorials, read a bit of Grokking the Gimp, and now I feel comfortable with it. It's done all my color correction, cropping, contrast masks and everything else I've wanted to do with a photograph. That's what I want from my programs, and I don't mind taking some time to learn how a program works if it will do what I want and do it well.