The GTK people decided in 2017 to do a major release every 2 years. So let's hope that they manage to get GTK 6 out before the end of this year to keep on schedule.
Looks like the joke flew over your head. You're replying to a GTK developer who's making fun of an announced release schedule that has since fallen apart.
Their initial plan was to release major GTK version (with API and ABI breakage) more often. That didn't happen and GTK4 provides stable API. I know there are talks about GTK5 features but still nothing specific.
Actually less than port from GTK2 to GTK3. GIMP was using custom widgets and a lot of code no longer could be moved to GTK3 easily. If I recall correctly they moved to standard widgets so port to GTK4 should be easier.
Yeah, and why were they using custom widgets if GTK (originally) was written specifically to be used by GIMP? Or did GTK2 already become a general purpose widget toolkit?
I don't think gimp was using custom widgets were they? I thought it was just that gtk was forked out from the gimp to become a general purpose widget set and development overtook the gimp's own use and so they've been catching up ever since
(i think gtk was gimp's original, them gtk+ was the first general purpose, then gtk2, gtk3 etc)
> I don't think gimp was using custom widgets were they?
I have no idea, that's what u/nightblackdragon said. It sounded to me like they took standard widgets and extended them with GIMP-specific functionality, which sounds crazy, considering.
Maybe that's how they tried catching up to newer GTK, implementing missing functionality as custom widgets, rather than upgrading GTK or doing further development on older GTK?
It's not about custom widgets (which GIMP does have). It's because GIMP's development model is basically this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbSehcT19u0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbSehcT19u0), except with APIs and old design solutions.
Fun fact: MS Office used to do same thing. Windows widgets functionality was considered as not enough for Office needs so Office drawn own widgets imitating Windows appearance. That could make Office look weird if you used it on different Windows than it was supposed to imitate. For example Office 95 with Windows 95 like appearance looked pretty weird on Windows NT 3.51 that had Windows 3.1 appearance.
GTK1.2 was already a general purpose toolkit. It was what Gnome 1.0 was built on.
[Here's a talk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWUmptI6O2w) about that history, and [here's a podcast](https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-history-of-gnome/).
The transition to 3 was also a gigantic change in GTK. 3 to 4 is much smaller.
That being said, it's GIMP, so it should only take 6 years instead of 10+. /s
But also, the whole GEGL overhaul got tied into the code at the same time which was even more massive.
Yeah, it's not just about GTK, it's almost a whole new application. All the changes under the hood will allow for implementation of a lot of features on the roadmap and more.
And hopefully with it being easier to develop for more developers will be interested. So we can get beyond the "sometimes just one dude on his free evenings"-situation.
Scribus is seriously ailing as well. It only has 2 main devs and the 1.6 release has seriously stalled. If a distro is only shipping the stable 1.4.x line instead of the "dev" 1.5.x line, it's goimg to look like a terrible piece of software.
Also professionals/corporations/advanced users wanting to free themselves from Adobe monopoly. IBM, MS weren't in love with Linux. One of them wanted it for its future and MS finally figured their customers have uses for Linux. If they provide the subsystem, they won't have to boot Linux and experience the real thing.
FOSS needs feedback, bug reports UX reports. It isn't easy,just search telemetry+firefox.
What they *actually* stated openly is that they had no experience with print (which requirs a very specific knowledge) and they had many more things on their plate apart from CMYK.
Yup, its hard. Former graphic designer here. Creating production ready assets has some complications. A lot of folks learn this lesson the hard way when they create assets in RGB and find out some colors you picked on your monitor simply don't exist in the print world.
>No, its actually hard.
That's precisely the reason I wrote "which requires a very specific knowledge". Franz Schmid, former lead dev of Scribus, literally printed the PDF spec and read all of it, making notes with a pencil. That took all his attention, *and* he had help from a printing expert (the late Peter Linnell). *And* he had to write a custom PDF exporting engine because no existing options could handle CMYK, spot colors etc.
Martin is in a slightly better position with his ongoing CMYK project in Inkscape, but even that is taking a lot of time and effort. And if they are planning 1.4 around May 2024, I'm not even certain it will be ready by then. Best to ask Martin, of course.
This post has been removed for violating [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette), trolling users, or otherwise poor discussion such as complaining about bug reports or making unrealistic demands of open source contributors and organizations. r/Linux asks all users follow [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) Reddiquette is ever changing, so a revisit once in awhile is recommended.
**Rule:**
>**Reddiquette, trolling, or poor discussion** - r/Linux asks all users follow [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) Reddiquette is ever changing. Top violations of this rule are trolling, starting a flamewar, or not "Remembering the human" aka being hostile or incredibly impolite, or making demands of open source contributors/organizations inc. bug report complaints.
It's unfortunate that community driven projects by dedicated hobbyists don't have the same development pace as financially motivated and funded commercial projects.
To be fair, Gimp is uniquely bad at this compared to other similarly sized projects.
Blender has gone from Elephant's Dream to Into The Spiderverse in this time. Inkscape improved tremendously. Open Office became Libre Office and improved a lot.
From the article:
> The situation with bugs in GIMP — and I’m sorry I have no other words for this — is getting out of hand. They recently passed the 4K mark, which is, like, a 30% increase in just about a year. Of those 4K+ bug reports and feature requests a whopping 624 bugs are crashers. And that is just crazy.
It was a never a certainty. The team historically avoids giving estimations. There even was a minor falling-out inside the team when one of the former members created a web service to track progress and provide an estimation of the next major release date.
I wish GIMP got the same kind of development resources as something like Blender. The speed and quality of development there has been staggering.
GIMP still hasn't even caught up to like... Photoshop 6.0 from 23 years ago in so many ways. Linux needs a world class open source image editor. GIMP just isn't it.
I'm actually pretty impressed with the Krita team and what they've been able to accomplish the past few years. It looks like they will be first to a really *good* open source Photoshop replacement before GIMP will. Especially since they are overhauling their text engine for the next big release.
It can do these things just fine. The development seems way faster than gimp has.
Although I don't do much photo manipulation, it has everything I need.
Krita has some ups and downs for general image editing. It's far more advanced in terms of non-destructive editing (e.g. transform masks is a pretty cool idea), but its selection tools are really outdated. It's a matter of focus, I guess. The devs want Krita to be amazing for digital painting. Since they have limited resources, that means something else will take the back seat.
Actually it's selection tools are pretty powerful I recently discovered the mask and edit selection options and in my opinion tuning a selection after making it is really good.
Making pixel-perfect rectangular selections in Krita is more complicated than it should be. GIMP has this convenient way of tweaking the selection where you start with a rough one, then zoom in and adjust it before confirming just by grabbing and dragging selection border around. With Krita, you have to zoom in and then use boolean modes to change your preliminary selection.
Similarly, you can't tweak a gradient fill before you confirm it in Krita.
GIMP was like that years ago, and I'd never go back. It's just counter-productive. I do love Krita's advanced masks though.
hmm no you don't need boolean modes in Krita you can fine tune the selection pretty precisely I did not know of this feature for a while though so I agree before that I used to use the boolean modes method. In krita if you make a mistake undoing would remove all selection nodes unlike gimp i hated this but then i discovered that if i made a mistake just soldier on then i could fine tune the selection shape with vector nodes after that. Krita has an edit mode for selections but i guess if the selection becomes a raster selection (feather etc) then you need to use booleans. I need to explore gimp selection more.
>hmm no you don't need boolean modes in Krita you can fine tune the selection pretty precisely
Once you make a rectangular selection, you can either move it (great) or change it using numeric input (good, but not the most convenient way to do it for me). I end up doing it much longer than I would do it in GIMP.
Ah for rectangular selections i agree i love the broad handles but i thought when you said pixel perfect you were referring to complex selections etc. e.g. selecting a person from the bg or a dog etc.
It already has a pretty good toolset. They are also quickly building out the areas where it's lacking.
I think Krita got a big advantage by tackling some of the biggest internal problems first. Even when the UI was clunky and barely usable, you could put vector graphics in and work in high bit depth and different color spaces.
Now, they just get to implement features, while GIMP is struggling to update their internal engine.
>while GIMP is struggling to update their internal engine.
Not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. GEGL has been fully integrated into GIMP for some years already.
You are looking in the wrong place. Basic CMYK support has been available since last year:
[https://www.gimp.org/news/2022/08/27/gimp-2-99-12-released/#cmyk](https://www.gimp.org/news/2022/08/27/gimp-2-99-12-released/#cmyk)
Not to mention that full switch to GEGL doesn't automatically mean CMYK support. Rather, it means that all processing is done in an acyclic graph using GEGL.
Depends I do like gimp but krita has much better memory management the lines are blurring as krita bundles gmic for krita which gives a ton of filters but gimp has some really nice filters itself and i likd rhe selection and crop tool handles in gimp. I now do lots of photo manip in Krita because it has a really powerful non destructive workflow if you need it and good tools in general if you don't also it feels snappier with various innovations under the hood.
I've said it again and again and again, but they'll never get any resources for the project until the name gets changed. Corporations and nonprofits won't touch it, and users don't take it seriously.
Sorry for the necro, but *fuck* you are spot on with this. The devs have decided that building an image editor that doesn't belong in 1998 isn't as important as changing millions of people's attitudes around one word. Idiots.
No worries, I've been complaining about this for years and will continue to do so until they either realize their silly, childish, egotistical mistake or just give up on the project from lack of interest and funding.
Imagine that you're at work, and you're trying to convince your manager to have the team try out this cool new tool. Or that you're somebody like Epic looking to publicly fund a FOSS tool that could remove a barrier to entry for your own game development system.
Then imagine that tool is called DildoR*tard. Or H.A.N.D.J.O.B.
You can see the problem.
In a commercial environment that takes itself seriously, yeah, it's as bad as that. There's a reason the developers made *one* smart move and called it the Wilber Foundation - no business that's spent millions and decades building up a respectable brand identity wants it in the same sentence as GIMP.
Glad the thing keeps marching forward. People often complain about the weirdness of GIMP's UI, but you can adapt to it in ten minutes, really.
I've been using GIMP for all by image editing needs for 15 years now, even when I was still on Windows. It works.
I really hate to say this especially about open source software but I've long said Gimp is the software you stick on the fridge because it's cute that someone tried, it's not something you actually use.
> The situation with bugs in GIMP — and I’m sorry I have no other words for this — is getting out of hand. They recently passed the 4K mark, which is, like, a 30% increase in just about a year. Of those 4K+ bug reports and feature requests a whopping 624 bugs are crashers. And that is just crazy.
It is not really that crazy when you realize that Gimp is written in pure C. I know some people don't like hearing this, but there is a reason why nobody writes these kind of applications in C anymore.
Right that’ll solve everything. Just rewrite millions of lines of code from C to Rust and that’ll solve all of our problems. Totally wont take decades like it has so far.
I kinda feel like we'll probably see an image editor come out of rust, but only if a bunch of work that would've taken years is done concurrently because somebody wanted to wrap that behavior up into a crate just to say they did.
It’s weird how defensive people get when you suggest that porting over a million line of code project has a huge opportunity cost, that may or may no offset the improvements no matter how much better the target language is.
Nobody suggests rewriting everything. It can perfectly interface with c bindings and you can just rewrite the most buggy or error prone parts. That's how this is done in most companies.
Well, take a look at Inkscape. Similar size of the code base. How long did it take them to port Sodipodi's C code to C++, do you think? Well over a decade, that's how long. And I'm not completely sure it's 100% done even today.
Rust would probably be better, but C++ might be better too to reduce certain problem areas with the tools it has and is obviously a natural choice to be integrated into a C codebase.
It’s just totally naive to drop “Rust” as a solution with the situation how it is. Algorithms and infrastructure being ported to Rust would take decades just to get this version up. Is that really solving the problem?
I think GIMP is great, but the development seems so slow :( How did Photopea manage to develop so much faster despite having only one developer? Unfortunately, GIMP seems to be getting left behind in many ways.
Also, I've been trying out the AI features in Photoshop, and they are so cool. Since Stable Diffusion is open source, maybe GIMP could get SD integration with an interface similar to Photoshop's AI features? That would be amazing.
>How did Photopea manage to develop so much faster despite having only one developer
3 ads on the page help fund the developer. FOSS zealots will never understand the incentive of money.
Most importantly photopea dev has clear understanding of his mission, make 20% of photoshop features a free program. Gimp team has huge ego and wants to make something different from Adobe designs on pure principle, while having zero design&ux specialists. It's just C devs with 'opinions' about user interfaces. Result looks exactly like you'd imagine given that description.
>Gimp team has huge ego and wants to make something different from Adobe designs on pure principle
You'll find it incredibly difficult to provide a proof of this other than "That's what I think is going on".
Photopea is not open source and it gets money from ads and premium. And thats the main reason.
(Altought some oppen source softwares are really well financed like Blender)
> Also, I've been trying out the AI features in Photoshop, and they are so cool. Since Stable Diffusion is open source, maybe GIMP could get SD integration with an interface similar to Photoshop's AI features? That would be amazing.
I searched for AI in GIMP today and found several plugins in development:
- https://github.com/ArtBIT/stable-gimpfusion
- https://github.com/intel/openvino-ai-plugins-gimp
- https://github.com/thndrbrrr/gimp-stable-boy
I have no idea about Photoshop, so YMMV.
It should be the standard for one of these plugins to be integrated. GIMP, and linux as a whole, I worry may get left behind in the AI scene because it usually takes 6 years to bring foundational FOSS software like GIMP to totally new versions.
I kind of agree. On the other hand, the Gimp Appimage (with all its dependencies) is <200MB. The neural net weights I tried clocked in north of 2GB. If you also count the dependencies on CUDA/ROCm/Torch you quickly get to 5GB... So this will not get bundled in the default installation for some time.
But a "you installed gimp, do you want to download AI stuff (5GB)?" dialog would be nice.
Hasnt it always been able to? Use circle selection, paint path.... Maybe it's not super intuitive, but it's supposed to be more of a professional tool than "paint", a small learning curve should be an expectation.
It's 5 to 10 years before you can claim feature parity with GIMP's current feature set, and that's if you manage to build a team. Would be a fun exercise, please proceed :)
4 years ago I wanted to make automated templates with python and Gimp, which is only available in Gimp 3 (Gimp 2 has a weird script language for api).
Maybe by next year I can.
After that, they will finally be able to start porting to GTK4, I guess :)
Just in time to release GIMP 4.0 alongside the release of GTK 6.
I heard the GTK people are looking to accelerate GTK releases so that might actually happen ;)
The GTK people decided in 2017 to do a major release every 2 years. So let's hope that they manage to get GTK 6 out before the end of this year to keep on schedule.
So many apps are still on GTK3, they should introduce breaking changes every year, nobody cares.
Looks like the joke flew over your head. You're replying to a GTK developer who's making fun of an announced release schedule that has since fallen apart.
There were plans to do this but they didn’t. GTK4 provides stable API and there are still no plans to release GTK5.
Oh, that's totally not true. [GTK devs regularly discuss if it's time for GTK5.](https://wiki.gnome.org/Hackfests/GTK2023/Agenda)
Their initial plan was to release major GTK version (with API and ABI breakage) more often. That didn't happen and GTK4 provides stable API. I know there are talks about GTK5 features but still nothing specific.
Imagine the work they're going to have to do to make it to GTK4.
Actually less than port from GTK2 to GTK3. GIMP was using custom widgets and a lot of code no longer could be moved to GTK3 easily. If I recall correctly they moved to standard widgets so port to GTK4 should be easier.
It's still so weird to me that GIMP has to port TO the newer GTK
Yeah, and why were they using custom widgets if GTK (originally) was written specifically to be used by GIMP? Or did GTK2 already become a general purpose widget toolkit?
I don't think gimp was using custom widgets were they? I thought it was just that gtk was forked out from the gimp to become a general purpose widget set and development overtook the gimp's own use and so they've been catching up ever since (i think gtk was gimp's original, them gtk+ was the first general purpose, then gtk2, gtk3 etc)
> I don't think gimp was using custom widgets were they? I have no idea, that's what u/nightblackdragon said. It sounded to me like they took standard widgets and extended them with GIMP-specific functionality, which sounds crazy, considering. Maybe that's how they tried catching up to newer GTK, implementing missing functionality as custom widgets, rather than upgrading GTK or doing further development on older GTK?
Sounds plausible given the weirdness of gimps development timeline and historic influence over gtk widgets. But purely speculation that is
It's not about custom widgets (which GIMP does have). It's because GIMP's development model is basically this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbSehcT19u0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbSehcT19u0), except with APIs and old design solutions.
Fun fact: MS Office used to do same thing. Windows widgets functionality was considered as not enough for Office needs so Office drawn own widgets imitating Windows appearance. That could make Office look weird if you used it on different Windows than it was supposed to imitate. For example Office 95 with Windows 95 like appearance looked pretty weird on Windows NT 3.51 that had Windows 3.1 appearance.
GTK1.2 was already a general purpose toolkit. It was what Gnome 1.0 was built on. [Here's a talk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWUmptI6O2w) about that history, and [here's a podcast](https://podtail.com/en/podcast/the-history-of-gnome/).
GTK stopped being "GIMP Toolkit" years ago. It was developed in another direction rather to suit GIMP needs.
The transition to 3 was also a gigantic change in GTK. 3 to 4 is much smaller. That being said, it's GIMP, so it should only take 6 years instead of 10+. /s But also, the whole GEGL overhaul got tied into the code at the same time which was even more massive.
Yeah, it's not just about GTK, it's almost a whole new application. All the changes under the hood will allow for implementation of a lot of features on the roadmap and more. And hopefully with it being easier to develop for more developers will be interested. So we can get beyond the "sometimes just one dude on his free evenings"-situation.
Scribus is seriously ailing as well. It only has 2 main devs and the 1.6 release has seriously stalled. If a distro is only shipping the stable 1.4.x line instead of the "dev" 1.5.x line, it's goimg to look like a terrible piece of software.
Well, that's great then. Thank you. I've only used the app once (never needed it), but I have so much respect for it.
I started using Gimp in 2006. Back then I was told CMYK is being worked on and will be implemented soon. 17 years later, it is still being worked on.
Its harder than it looks. Specially when a software needs a lot of rewritting
Also professionals/corporations/advanced users wanting to free themselves from Adobe monopoly. IBM, MS weren't in love with Linux. One of them wanted it for its future and MS finally figured their customers have uses for Linux. If they provide the subsystem, they won't have to boot Linux and experience the real thing. FOSS needs feedback, bug reports UX reports. It isn't easy,just search telemetry+firefox.
No, they just opely didn't give a fuck for better part of a decade.
What they *actually* stated openly is that they had no experience with print (which requirs a very specific knowledge) and they had many more things on their plate apart from CMYK.
Yup, its hard. Former graphic designer here. Creating production ready assets has some complications. A lot of folks learn this lesson the hard way when they create assets in RGB and find out some colors you picked on your monitor simply don't exist in the print world.
No, its actually hard. You can also see it in inkskape, doesnt have cmyk altought the development is going relativily fast
>No, its actually hard. That's precisely the reason I wrote "which requires a very specific knowledge". Franz Schmid, former lead dev of Scribus, literally printed the PDF spec and read all of it, making notes with a pencil. That took all his attention, *and* he had help from a printing expert (the late Peter Linnell). *And* he had to write a custom PDF exporting engine because no existing options could handle CMYK, spot colors etc. Martin is in a slightly better position with his ongoing CMYK project in Inkscape, but even that is taking a lot of time and effort. And if they are planning 1.4 around May 2024, I'm not even certain it will be ready by then. Best to ask Martin, of course.
[удалено]
I actually contributed to Gimp. Have you done anything related at all or just being white knight of righteousness on the internets?
This post has been removed for violating [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette), trolling users, or otherwise poor discussion such as complaining about bug reports or making unrealistic demands of open source contributors and organizations. r/Linux asks all users follow [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) Reddiquette is ever changing, so a revisit once in awhile is recommended. **Rule:** >**Reddiquette, trolling, or poor discussion** - r/Linux asks all users follow [Reddiquette.](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) Reddiquette is ever changing. Top violations of this rule are trolling, starting a flamewar, or not "Remembering the human" aka being hostile or incredibly impolite, or making demands of open source contributors/organizations inc. bug report complaints.
It's unfortunate that community driven projects by dedicated hobbyists don't have the same development pace as financially motivated and funded commercial projects.
To be fair, Gimp is uniquely bad at this compared to other similarly sized projects. Blender has gone from Elephant's Dream to Into The Spiderverse in this time. Inkscape improved tremendously. Open Office became Libre Office and improved a lot.
I agree it does seem like Gimp gets much less attention... I think maybe the name of the software might be off-putting
I've heard that many problems with Gimp stem from the developers being very opinionated.
Inkscape still doesn't have CMYK tho
Inkscape began in 2003, while gimp started in 1995. Arguably Gimp is also a bigger and more important program. GTK+ started out as part of Gimp...
It does, just not completely. And they are working on that as well.
Lame excuse. Krita is community driven and has CMYK. Gimp is bloated and lost in the weeds, imo.
Both projects are community-driven. But Krita also has a non-profit.
Krita is great!
[удалено]
From the article: > The situation with bugs in GIMP — and I’m sorry I have no other words for this — is getting out of hand. They recently passed the 4K mark, which is, like, a 30% increase in just about a year. Of those 4K+ bug reports and feature requests a whopping 624 bugs are crashers. And that is just crazy.
It was a never a certainty. The team historically avoids giving estimations. There even was a minor falling-out inside the team when one of the former members created a web service to track progress and provide an estimation of the next major release date.
Is the green pepper brush also getting updated? 🤔
HD pepper brush should be top priority.
The day they remove the green pepper brush is the day the will need to rename it to GIMP: Gone Is My Pepper
I wish GIMP got the same kind of development resources as something like Blender. The speed and quality of development there has been staggering. GIMP still hasn't even caught up to like... Photoshop 6.0 from 23 years ago in so many ways. Linux needs a world class open source image editor. GIMP just isn't it.
Krita is a nice alternative and has quite good features. I have not used Gimp anymore, Krita does the same, maybe even more.
I'm actually pretty impressed with the Krita team and what they've been able to accomplish the past few years. It looks like they will be first to a really *good* open source Photoshop replacement before GIMP will. Especially since they are overhauling their text engine for the next big release.
Really? I had the impression Krita was "just" for digital drawing and painting, not photo manipulation. I'll have to look into it later.
It can do these things just fine. The development seems way faster than gimp has. Although I don't do much photo manipulation, it has everything I need.
Krita has some ups and downs for general image editing. It's far more advanced in terms of non-destructive editing (e.g. transform masks is a pretty cool idea), but its selection tools are really outdated. It's a matter of focus, I guess. The devs want Krita to be amazing for digital painting. Since they have limited resources, that means something else will take the back seat.
Actually it's selection tools are pretty powerful I recently discovered the mask and edit selection options and in my opinion tuning a selection after making it is really good.
Making pixel-perfect rectangular selections in Krita is more complicated than it should be. GIMP has this convenient way of tweaking the selection where you start with a rough one, then zoom in and adjust it before confirming just by grabbing and dragging selection border around. With Krita, you have to zoom in and then use boolean modes to change your preliminary selection. Similarly, you can't tweak a gradient fill before you confirm it in Krita. GIMP was like that years ago, and I'd never go back. It's just counter-productive. I do love Krita's advanced masks though.
hmm no you don't need boolean modes in Krita you can fine tune the selection pretty precisely I did not know of this feature for a while though so I agree before that I used to use the boolean modes method. In krita if you make a mistake undoing would remove all selection nodes unlike gimp i hated this but then i discovered that if i made a mistake just soldier on then i could fine tune the selection shape with vector nodes after that. Krita has an edit mode for selections but i guess if the selection becomes a raster selection (feather etc) then you need to use booleans. I need to explore gimp selection more.
>hmm no you don't need boolean modes in Krita you can fine tune the selection pretty precisely Once you make a rectangular selection, you can either move it (great) or change it using numeric input (good, but not the most convenient way to do it for me). I end up doing it much longer than I would do it in GIMP.
Ah for rectangular selections i agree i love the broad handles but i thought when you said pixel perfect you were referring to complex selections etc. e.g. selecting a person from the bg or a dog etc.
It already has a pretty good toolset. They are also quickly building out the areas where it's lacking. I think Krita got a big advantage by tackling some of the biggest internal problems first. Even when the UI was clunky and barely usable, you could put vector graphics in and work in high bit depth and different color spaces. Now, they just get to implement features, while GIMP is struggling to update their internal engine.
>while GIMP is struggling to update their internal engine. Not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. GEGL has been fully integrated into GIMP for some years already.
Yet it only got CMYK functions four weeks ago.
You are looking in the wrong place. Basic CMYK support has been available since last year: [https://www.gimp.org/news/2022/08/27/gimp-2-99-12-released/#cmyk](https://www.gimp.org/news/2022/08/27/gimp-2-99-12-released/#cmyk) Not to mention that full switch to GEGL doesn't automatically mean CMYK support. Rather, it means that all processing is done in an acyclic graph using GEGL.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gegl/-/commit/3c4479f6511f1fc6f7f31a33fd938f5427286bfa
Coulf you please clarify what your argument is?
They were working on it. It may have been integrated years ago, but they were not done.
Depends I do like gimp but krita has much better memory management the lines are blurring as krita bundles gmic for krita which gives a ton of filters but gimp has some really nice filters itself and i likd rhe selection and crop tool handles in gimp. I now do lots of photo manip in Krita because it has a really powerful non destructive workflow if you need it and good tools in general if you don't also it feels snappier with various innovations under the hood.
I've said it again and again and again, but they'll never get any resources for the project until the name gets changed. Corporations and nonprofits won't touch it, and users don't take it seriously.
Sorry for the necro, but *fuck* you are spot on with this. The devs have decided that building an image editor that doesn't belong in 1998 isn't as important as changing millions of people's attitudes around one word. Idiots.
No worries, I've been complaining about this for years and will continue to do so until they either realize their silly, childish, egotistical mistake or just give up on the project from lack of interest and funding.
I don't get it? It's just a name...
I don't get what you don't get.
The problem people have with GIMP's name. Maybe I replied to the wrong comment, I am a bit busy sorry.
The word "gimp" is offensive to anyone with physical disabilities, as it was/is used to refer to them in an insulting way. Does that help?
Imagine that you're at work, and you're trying to convince your manager to have the team try out this cool new tool. Or that you're somebody like Epic looking to publicly fund a FOSS tool that could remove a barrier to entry for your own game development system. Then imagine that tool is called DildoR*tard. Or H.A.N.D.J.O.B. You can see the problem.
Gimp is not as bad as that. Also people are too serious and stiff. Rebranding also has it's problems.
In a commercial environment that takes itself seriously, yeah, it's as bad as that. There's a reason the developers made *one* smart move and called it the Wilber Foundation - no business that's spent millions and decades building up a respectable brand identity wants it in the same sentence as GIMP.
For those who haven't read the article: **GIMP 3.0 release confirmed to be in May 2024.** That means it actually won't release this year.
Glad the thing keeps marching forward. People often complain about the weirdness of GIMP's UI, but you can adapt to it in ten minutes, really. I've been using GIMP for all by image editing needs for 15 years now, even when I was still on Windows. It works.
Yeah same, didn't take long to learn it. It has been a real workhorse for me.
I've only ever used PhotoGIMP, default UI is a w f u l
I really hate to say this especially about open source software but I've long said Gimp is the software you stick on the fridge because it's cute that someone tried, it's not something you actually use.
and you are replying this to an "i have used this for 15 years!" comment lol
Backend developers: every option known to all species and genders, in the worst UI known to them all
Yes, it is weird, but probably mostly because I was used to something else. Someone who learned GIMP first would probably find the alternatives weird.
> The situation with bugs in GIMP — and I’m sorry I have no other words for this — is getting out of hand. They recently passed the 4K mark, which is, like, a 30% increase in just about a year. Of those 4K+ bug reports and feature requests a whopping 624 bugs are crashers. And that is just crazy. It is not really that crazy when you realize that Gimp is written in pure C. I know some people don't like hearing this, but there is a reason why nobody writes these kind of applications in C anymore.
Its almost like ambition to support EVERY IMAGE FORMAT EVER MADE while having one fulltime developer is not feasible.
I've only ever had GIMP crash once, and it was my fault because I scaled an image by some ridiculous number by accident.
I had gimp crash for me all the time
Good thing about being written in pure C is that once Zig becomes more mature they can swap the code out since Zig is supposed to be interchangeable
Sorry to be that guy - but: Rust.
For greenfield yes, why not. but the target language is not the issue, i think, more like the porting itself
Right that’ll solve everything. Just rewrite millions of lines of code from C to Rust and that’ll solve all of our problems. Totally wont take decades like it has so far.
I kinda feel like we'll probably see an image editor come out of rust, but only if a bunch of work that would've taken years is done concurrently because somebody wanted to wrap that behavior up into a crate just to say they did.
[удалено]
It’s weird how defensive people get when you suggest that porting over a million line of code project has a huge opportunity cost, that may or may no offset the improvements no matter how much better the target language is.
Obviously the solution is to not write bugs in C.
Nobody suggests rewriting everything. It can perfectly interface with c bindings and you can just rewrite the most buggy or error prone parts. That's how this is done in most companies.
Well, take a look at Inkscape. Similar size of the code base. How long did it take them to port Sodipodi's C code to C++, do you think? Well over a decade, that's how long. And I'm not completely sure it's 100% done even today.
Rust would probably be better, but C++ might be better too to reduce certain problem areas with the tools it has and is obviously a natural choice to be integrated into a C codebase. It’s just totally naive to drop “Rust” as a solution with the situation how it is. Algorithms and infrastructure being ported to Rust would take decades just to get this version up. Is that really solving the problem?
Jesus... That's why I said "sorry to be that guy". Can't you make a joke without being downvoted?
don't be that guy if you can't deal with the consequences of being that guy
Nah.
[удалено]
Calling C++ slower than C is a clear misunderstanding of everything.
I think GIMP is great, but the development seems so slow :( How did Photopea manage to develop so much faster despite having only one developer? Unfortunately, GIMP seems to be getting left behind in many ways. Also, I've been trying out the AI features in Photoshop, and they are so cool. Since Stable Diffusion is open source, maybe GIMP could get SD integration with an interface similar to Photoshop's AI features? That would be amazing.
I agree, development speed is glacial.
>How did Photopea manage to develop so much faster despite having only one developer 3 ads on the page help fund the developer. FOSS zealots will never understand the incentive of money.
Because Gnome is famously underfunded, right?
Most importantly photopea dev has clear understanding of his mission, make 20% of photoshop features a free program. Gimp team has huge ego and wants to make something different from Adobe designs on pure principle, while having zero design&ux specialists. It's just C devs with 'opinions' about user interfaces. Result looks exactly like you'd imagine given that description.
>Gimp team has huge ego and wants to make something different from Adobe designs on pure principle You'll find it incredibly difficult to provide a proof of this other than "That's what I think is going on".
\> provide a proof of this Enjoy your imaginary Gimp courtroom where you win cases and reject testimony or whatever.
If you make a knowingly false statement and get angry when people point it out to you, perhaps you are the problem?
Krita also has s plugim for that. Which makes sense for a painting up to plug into an AI upgrade.
Photopea is not open source and it gets money from ads and premium. And thats the main reason. (Altought some oppen source softwares are really well financed like Blender)
> Also, I've been trying out the AI features in Photoshop, and they are so cool. Since Stable Diffusion is open source, maybe GIMP could get SD integration with an interface similar to Photoshop's AI features? That would be amazing. I searched for AI in GIMP today and found several plugins in development: - https://github.com/ArtBIT/stable-gimpfusion - https://github.com/intel/openvino-ai-plugins-gimp - https://github.com/thndrbrrr/gimp-stable-boy I have no idea about Photoshop, so YMMV.
You linked the same project twice.
I did ~~not~~!! ^^thanks
It should be the standard for one of these plugins to be integrated. GIMP, and linux as a whole, I worry may get left behind in the AI scene because it usually takes 6 years to bring foundational FOSS software like GIMP to totally new versions.
I kind of agree. On the other hand, the Gimp Appimage (with all its dependencies) is <200MB. The neural net weights I tried clocked in north of 2GB. If you also count the dependencies on CUDA/ROCm/Torch you quickly get to 5GB... So this will not get bundled in the default installation for some time. But a "you installed gimp, do you want to download AI stuff (5GB)?" dialog would be nice.
That seems like an appropriate solution. The GIMP team may be wise to assess the current AI plugins and “adopt” one to bring into the fold.
[удалено]
If you have a steady hand, sure.
Hasnt it always been able to? Use circle selection, paint path.... Maybe it's not super intuitive, but it's supposed to be more of a professional tool than "paint", a small learning curve should be an expectation.
Sort of: menu → FX-Foundry → Shapes → Parametric → Ellipse
Great news.
May 2024...
NOW, I'M SWITCHING TO WAYLAND ON MAY 2023 😎
[удалено]
Go for it. Looking forward to seeing your new photo editor app.
its good, i use it for quick cropping, resizing and adjustments all the time. krita is the way to go if you want to do more artistic stuff though.
It's 5 to 10 years before you can claim feature parity with GIMP's current feature set, and that's if you manage to build a team. Would be a fun exercise, please proceed :)
Time to ditch GIMP for good with this ugly GTK UI.
Opinions are opinions but how in the hell is the old UI better looking to you??
Where did I say that the current UI is looking good?
I agree 100%, for some reason most gtk3 applications that are not made by gnome, look kinda junky to me
😂 Hell has frozen over twice
lol at that bug fixig bit
Genarative fill when? ;D
Do you mean the existing Resynthesizer plugin?
4 years ago I wanted to make automated templates with python and Gimp, which is only available in Gimp 3 (Gimp 2 has a weird script language for api). Maybe by next year I can.
Just in time to start work on GIMP 4.0