GIMP 2.3.4, the more usable image manipulation program

Hm? Gimp 2.2 already supports that. I just tried the FlareFX filter and I can resize the preview area by resizing the window.

And you can also set a larger default size as explained here.

If you find thinks like this sweet, then here you can look at it:
http://registry.gimp.org/plugin?id=5479

wow
just wow

Hi

I showed my dad the GIMP and my sister both absolute computer newbies.. and really not talented at that topic. But they got around with it. The catched the more window thingy without a problem.

The windows version of photoshop confused my dad, because the menus are bloated and not really structured and the window in window thing was the killer for him.

So now my parents have a nice ubuntu on their laptop with gimp and all the other stuff and they are really happy with it.

If you dont get how to do things in the gimp, then PLEASE do a handfull of tutorials and you will surely get the menu structure and the "how can i do what i want to "thing and you will be just another happy gimp user.

Tutorials are on the GIMP Site itself or on www.gimpforce.org

Greets
Waldgeist

Hi..

I haven't said in a word that i never used photoshop dude..
Before i got to gimp i used:
Photopaint, Photoshop, Paintshop Pro for several years...

At first Photopaint then Paintshop Pro and after that Photoshop for one year.. then i got to gimp.. and one year later i switched to Linux completely because i found replaces for every software i used under windows.

Greets
Waldgeist

If that saves me $500, then hell yes, I'd rather be biased than poor!

I do indeed believe that the GIMP menus are better organized. Not saying that things would be perfect, but the menus in this development release already make a lot of sense to me. That's something that you can't say about the Photoshop menu hierarchy.

I just feel Photoshop is better organized, and it's easier to do some things that I just have no idea how to do with GIMP. Besides, I can't for the death of me understand how to close the selection when using the shape selecting tool (or whatever it is in english) o_O I have tried clicking with both left and right button, holding shift, control and alt down in different combinations...Why can't things be consistent? Also I wish I could just minimize the main window and have them all minimize, and pop up the same way. But then again, I was only saying my own opinion.
-WareKala

All that has been taken care of in 2.3. And really, Photoshop isn't organized. The UI is a nightmare, there is absolutely no logic in it. Everything is just where it used to be for the last 10 years. Adobe has definitely not invented good user interface design.

My father is learning to do image manipulation (he needs it at work as an architect). So his job gave him photoshop, but he can't figure out anything in that program. So I gave him the gimp and now he gets the work done. So, in this case photoshop is considered useless, while gimp gets the job done. I guess it's just a matter of preference...

Personaly I was very shocked when I saw photoshop. That program is horrible and makes very little sense to me. The gimp isn't amazing, but at least I can make it do what I want. Perhaps it's genetic?

> I used to work with ps, now I use gimp. GIMP is very powerfull tool indeed. But very often I miss some photoshop features.

Which?

> Maybe it's a matter of preference, maybe not. Sometimes I just have to do more 'clicks' or keystrokes to achieve a result.

GIMP people are very interested in keynav and such. Getting concrete would help here.

It's the same with me, altho I had a manager once who insisted that photoshop has "the best interface ever". I'd dissagree, admitedly I have more experience in the gimp but photoshop just seems cluttered.

Years ago, I couldn't figure out how to use Paint Shop Pro even though I've used MS Paint. Does that mean Paint Shop Pro is a mess?

After having used Gimp for a while now, I really like it, and don't find it confusing at all. A friend of mine also says that Gimp is "very powerful" and "very userfriendly" and he had only used Gimp several times.

I believe that it is a bad idea making it "too easy" to people get development releases. Since they are not yet considered "gold" and probably have a lot of problems in them yet, I guess it is a good idea to make it source only.

Stable releases gets shipped with almost every distribution you can think of, so this is not much of a problem for those. Even if you can't get a binary directly from the gimp site (witch I don't know if it's fact or not)

Please note that the whole GNOME platform, and the GIMP are only provided as source code because we just don't have the manpower to create RPMs, .debs etc. Feel free to help out :).

Why not just an autopackage then? Distros can be responsible for rpms and debs. Autopackage has been working fairly well for Abiword.

Yes, why don't you just do an autopackage and distribute it?

FYI, I am one of the autopackage core developers and maintainer of the Gimp autopackage.

We have a Gimp autopackage but I lack the free time to maintain it. And we only have packages of Gimp 2.0 and 2.2. If anybody is willing to take over maintenance of this package, please email the autopackage mailing list.

Thank you.

Perhaps you have some time to help fixing bug 317113? That would probably make your life easier in the long run ;)

If you look at bug 139580 which is linked from the very page you posted, you'll see that we (the autopackage team, but more specifically: FooBarWidget) is trying to do that...

All I can see there is a patch that was rejected for technical reasons quite a while ago. Obviously there is interest in making GIMP relocatable based on the GLib API of binreloc. A new patch would probably increase the likelihood that this happens soon,

I'll try to put together a new patch next week if I can find enough time.