GIMP 2.8: understanding UI changes

GIMP 2.8: understanding UI changes

There's quite a lot to tell about GIMP 2.8: better interface, new features, improved tools and so on. Would you like to use it to its full potential?

Instead of working on a full review of GIMP 2.8 forever, how about explaining essential changes in digestible chunks? Let's start with changes in user interface.

Save And Export

You'd probably expect the review of UI changes to start with the single-window mode, but let's break the pattern for once and start with the most controversial change.

Since v2.8 the application exposes the internal difference between saving and exporting and doesn't let you just Ctrl+S your JPEG or PNG file anymore. Why, oh why did the team do it, one might ask...

What Was Before

First of all, GIMP doesn't really have any special modes for different file types. Internally it only deals with capabilities of its own project file format, XCF. When it opens a file that isn't in the native file format, such as JPEG or PNG, it actually creates a new project and imports this file to it.

It might even preprocess the imported data, in case of e.g. FITS. But once it's imported, GIMP handles non-native data as its own, allowing you to add more layers and group them, draw Bezier curves etc.

Still with me?

Now, this is important: many of those original file formats cannot store all the extra data that you created. So when you tried to save it back with v2.6, here is what actually used to happen:

  1. You tell GIMP what destination file format you need.
  2. GIMP activates the required plug-in for storing data in that file format.
  3. The plug-in tells GIMP which information can be stored, which can't and which needs processing (e.g. rolling multiple layers into one) before it can be stored.
  4. GIMP might ask you to specify details relevant to the file format you chose.
  5. Then it saves data.

Sounds boring, eh? Well, the user-visible effect was that every time you saved to a non-XCF file, you had to confirm that you really did mean to lose all the extra data, thank you very much.

In other words, GIMP used to assume that you don't mind accidental loss of unrecoverable project data and bothered you with confirmation dialogs. It was a convoluted logic, but people got used to it.

What The Team Did

In 2006 the team sat down with Peter Sikking of man + machine interface works and came up with a project vision (previously lacking) that basically says:

  • We want GIMP to be a tool used by professionals who work on complex projects.
  • This is our target audience, and it has certain workflows.
  • We want to change GIMP to honor those workflows.

The separation between saving and exporting is the direct result of that decision. In a nutshell, the new logic is:

  1. GIMP is targeted at hi-end use and work with multiple layers, extra channels etc.
  2. Only GIMP's own file format can store all of that reliably (PSD is alien).
  3. Therefore GIMP can only open and save its own files without losing anything essential.
  4. Hence everything else is imported and exported.

The major benefit of this change is that it fully supports the primary use case when you work on a complex multi-layered project and save a flattened representation for sharing and/or review. The additional benefit is that GIMP won't bother you with confirmations for flattening layers while exporting to JPEG or PNG.

Let's observe how it actually works.

The New Primary Workflow

For example, you can work on complex images stored in a private Dropbox folder as XCF and then export to PNG to a public folder a client can read and periodically overwrite the file with just a shortcut and no annoying dialogs.

Here is what it looks like. You created an arbitrary multilayer image, saved as XCF, but haven't exported yet:

When you export for the first time, GIMP asks you for settings just once and never again.

Now that you exported, all subsequent exports will be available via Ctrl+E by default in an non-interruptable manner, and the filename will be appended to the menu command.

You can keep pressing Ctrl+S to save the project file and Ctrl+E whenever you need to export.

The New Secondary Workflow

What about a different workflow, when you open a single-layered file such as JPEG or PNG, quickly edit it and want to just resave it to the original file?

GIMP 2.8 supports this workflow too. While it still imports rather than opens non-project files, it understands the kind of image you opened, so instead of “Export to %filename%” you get “Overwrite %filename%", without a shortcut:

Choosing that command will save your changes back to the original file, and, once again, it will not warn you about multiple layers, if any are present.

If you choose to save to XCF, GIMP will understand that as saving the state of the image to a new project file and will stop caring about that source image you “imported”. The connection to the original file will be gone:

And if you export to e.g. TIFF, it will be “Export to %filename%” again.

Hate The Change? Relieve The Pain

What if you absolutely hate this new behavior and will never or rarely need saving XCF? You can configure GIMP to do that.

Use Edit / Keyboard Shortcuts menu command to open the shortcuts configuration dialog, then type in “over" in the search filter:

Click on the cell that says “Disabled" for overwriting. You will be asked to confirm that you want to remove Ctrl+S shortcut mapping from the Save command.

The new assignment will be remembered:

Now you can try opening an image file:

Just as you've grown to do, if you don't mind the menu item to be called differently. There will be just two behavior changes to get used to.

First of all, when you close that image, you will be warned that you didn't save the whole state (you imported that image, remember?)

But if your images are small (e.g. screenshots), you don't have to bother closing them all the time: the new single window mode is a major relief when you have many windows open. You can just close all at once periodically.

(Personally, I rarely quit GIMP and often find myself closing images I edited a week or two ago. I only ever quit it to rebuild a new revision and test something, and I only have 2GB of RAM while running GNOME 3.)

Finally, when you create a new image from scratch and just want to save to JPEG or PNG, you will still have to export (Ctrl+E) first.

Why Couldn't They Just Add A Checkbox?

Isn't it possible to just add a checkbox in the configuration dialog somewhere? It is.

Would it be a good idea? No, it would be horrible. Let's have some reasoning again.

  1. In general, options complicate code and make it less manageable. Every option virtually increases amount of cases where application can fail. A snowball can soon become an avalanche.
  2. Certain planned changes such as better native CMYK support presume that color separation is done a special mode for exporting. Maintaining a related behavior switch, when you have such a feature, would be hell.
  3. Behavior options make documentation convoluted and lacking consistence.

It's quite possible that none of that bothers you as a user. It's a developer's issue, no? Well, consider this: after you've read the product vision, do you feel like you are part of it, or maybe you only used GIMP, because something like Pinta wasn't around?

It's one hell of a question. People still take offence at this change, and there is probably no cure for that other than repeating again and again: the team doesn't hate you, they just refocused on a group of users for whom this makes a lot of sense.

Single-Window Mode

There isn't really much to say about it:

  • The toggle is here: Windows / Single-Window Mode.
  • The forced combined elements are image windows and the toolbox. You can still float dockable dialogs and move them to a second display.
  • Image windows are grouped in tabs which have thumbnails instead of file names (sadly, not configurable).
  • You can pick a layer in one image, drag it and drop onto a thumbnail of another image's window to append that layer.

Tabs in single-window mode

Here is a dirty trick you probably would never figure other than accidentally. GIMP merges docks to the single-window mode based on their position in relation to the main window. So if you want the toolbar to the right, do the castling (as in chess):

Castling of windows

Re-enabling the single-window mode dock the toolbar to the right:

Toolbox docked to the right

If you want to temporarily hide all dockable dialogs in the toolbox, the Tab shortcut is still available

The much anticipated optional single-window mode is actually side A of the whole LP. The B side hasn't yet been delivered in a form of a specification, and the dedicated developer is mostly absent these days anyway.

So things like being able to view multiple images at once in the single-window mode or even sync navigation in them will hopefully happen later. Even so, the change was greeted with mostly cheers and few muted boos.

Multi-Column Dock Windows

Since v2.8 you can join dockable dialogs horizontally. You can probably think of many uses, but the one I have in mind is when you have a really complex project with tons of layers, and you need to see many of them at once.

Image courtesy by Alexia Death

All you need to do is just pick a dockable dialog and drag it to another dockable dialog till you see a highlighted vertical line that marks the connection.

The Slider widget

In the past GIMP abused a combination of a label and a slider, and sometimes even a spinbox widget. And since no label was equal to another in the tools' options dialog, widgets were misaligned. What's even worse, that bloated min width of the dialog. As if it wasn't bad enough, the default slider widget wasn't easy to use with a Wacom stylus.

So Michael Natterer implemented a new experimental widget based on a brainstorming idea by Peter Sikking. The new widget that combines all those three widgets. The label was placed inside the slider area, and the slider area was made more prominent.

The size of a change step depends on the position of the mouse / stylus pointer:

Position of pointers

The widget has several deficiencies such as lack of a logarithmic scale. The team is in agreement that the tools' options have to be redone to become more compact anyway, so the next 10 weeks an intern will be working with Peter Sikking on a concept of a new widget set.

Simple Math Expressions In Size Entries

Sometimes you need to adjust an image just a little bit to make it fit an area. Or you know you need to resize it to a certain percentage of the original size. Whatever the reason, you are lazy to calculate the resulted image size and you'd rather have GIMP work it out for you.

The new version of GIMP allows you using arbitrary units is size entry boxes. Let's say you are working in pixels and you need to reduce the width by 20%. Easy! Just type this in. Pressing Enter or Tab will complete the computation:

Math expressions

You can mix any units listed in the Edit / Units dialog: pixels, inches, percents. GIMP will take care of conversions for you.

This is probably the only UI change that nobody really hates.

Interestingly enough, the size entry widget was rewritten during Google Summer Of Code 2011 and is likely to become part of v2.10. On a user-visible level (and that's not all there is to it) the widget has unit selection inside the entry field.

Our next stop will be working with layers in GIMP 2.8.

Was it useful? There's more:

216 Comments

Leave a comment
  1. >>OK, so I just did a quick edit on an image for web posting.
    >>I used the over-write choice then was confronted by a confirmation to discard changes when I went to close the image.

    Yes, but it turns out you’re not supposed to use GIMP for a “quick edit”, you’re supposed to use something else.  What are you supposed to use?  Beats me, I’ve been using Gimp for all my image editing for eight years.

    I think this approach of only being for professional users doing serious business is incredibly wrongheaded. They talk about honoring the workflow of professional users, but they’re inflicting an artificial workflow on everybody.  People aren’t born professional graphic artists.  Many start out as casual users.

    I’m averaging about four hours a day with gimp.

  2. >>>OK, so I just did a quick edit on an image for web posting.
    >>I used the over-write choice then was confronted by a confirmation to discard changes when I went to close the image.

    But, you see, you’re no longer supposed to be using GIMP for “a quick edit”.  You’re supposed to be using something else for that now.

    GNU/Linux is guided by developers, and there are advantages and disadvantages to that.  The advantages are numerous.  The disadvantages are what happens when software developers take on tasks like public relations (KDE4), and the present case, which is what happens when software developers try to anticipate the needs of artists.

    It’s going to work out.  I don’t know how, but everybody is going to get what they need.  So try to be respectful while being critical

    There’s already been a fork of GIMP,  It’s a complicated compile, so I’ve stuck with version 2.6, but here’s the link.

    https://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp

     

  3. Here’s a forked version that treats all file format types equally.  Check out the READ ME
    at the bottom of the page.

    https://github.com/mskala/noxcf-gimp

    The problem with free software is that software developers are pushed into rolwes they are not suited for, like public relations and anticipating the needs of artists.

  4. Alexandre Prokoudine 18 September 2012 at 1:28 am

    Let me see if I got it right and please tell me if I got it wrong.

    You personally don’t like some of the changes.

    Therefore free software teams must be consisting of just developers without training in public relations. They also must be not talking to actual users but rather anticipating their needs and ultimately getting it wrong.

    Is that the idea you have?

  5. Inconsistencies annoy me.

    If I can Open a .jpg, I should be able to Save a .jpg. Keep it consistent.

    Gimp now has this wrong. You can Open any file type, but can’t Save any file type.

  6. Extremely frustrated that I cannot open a series of PNG files, color balance them, save them, and close them. Now I not only have to export them, but I also have to hit CTRL+W and then click “discard changes” in order to close the document even though I have just saved my modifications.
    GIMP does not allow me to reconfigure back to open/save the same file to the same format.
    GIMP claims that it is safer to force people to save in XCF format. But since I don’t want to multiply the files on my hard drive, I am forced to get used to clicking a “discard changes” button as part of standard procedure. Forcing me to either click “discard changes,” or multiply the versions of a file on my hard drive (and risk accidental deletion as I clean up duplications) does not even fit their purported rationale. Preventing me from reconfiguring back to the way other image-processing programs work is the sort of barrier-enforcing behavior I expect from commercial/closed-source vendors, not an open-source project.

  7. When in Windows, I use Photoshop. When in Linux (which is the majority of the time) I use GIMP. In Photoshop - used by “Pro Users” and considered pretty much the image management software standard by them - if I open a png file, say, crop it and click save, it overwrites-saves the file… to png. GIMP *used* to do that. I’m pretty sure that “Pro Users” will find this new “automatic-save-to-XCF” feature a bit disconcerting, only because of all the software I’ve ever used, it’s the only one that behaves this way. I’m pretty sure this assessment would be similar for most people, Pro Users included.

    Not an improvement for my workflow at all… going back to 2.6.

  8. The new Gimp Save/Export strategy is dim witted and likely to lose users.

    Libreoffice exports to .pdf because once exported, it can not be reopened. For every other file format, it is in the ‘save’ dialog.

    There is no reason that Gimp couldn’t have continued to have done this except a Microsoft-style programmer’s intransigence “I know what is best for you, just get used to it”

    Is there anyone interested in getting the older source and creating a fork to keep it the way users actually want?

  9. Alexandre Prokoudine 07 November 2012 at 2:29 pm

    There already is a fork. See the comment from 17 September 2012 by ugglybabee.

  10. This export business is really, really upsetting. When I use Photoshop, if I need to save _everything_, I save to .PSD. If I’m doing what I _mostly_ do, and use Photoshop to adjust contrast, colour, colourspace etc, before immediately using the image in some other software, I just overwrite what I loaded. You don’t have to be a scientist for this to be understandable. This is intuitive.

    How the GIMP devs could have made such a catastrophic mistake is totally beyond me. It shows a terrible understanding of how users work - and that includes power users.

  11. Oh well, Jack, that’s where the beauty of open-source gleams: a fork already exists sans the “Save-Only-To-XCF” file management approach. I’ve already downloaded it - just need to compile it now.
    Since I’m already compiling Blender builds (revisions) from svn, I don’t think this is going to be much different. Hopefully.

    I still think that the GIMP team deserve our heartfelt thanks for giving us this great program and for supporting it. After thinking about it, I really can’t fault them for wanting to make the changes they are making: it’s their vision, their product and… hey, it’s free AND open source. Can we change that ribbon in MS Office, make it behave more like what we’re used to? No. But we do have options here… and we have the GIMP team to thank for making those options possible.

  12. Okay, so I had something written but it’s been said many times over.

    I’ll be watching to see what happens, but “save to PNG and then close” is the thing I do most with GIMP and I simply can’t handle that being bogged down.

    Suffice to say, I’m among the frustrated and will be happily retreating to 2.6 for now. It does everything I need it to! No hard feelings.

  13. Count me in with the frustrated.
    Fine, pop a warning that says “Are you sure you want to save in a format that loses some information…” like LibreOffice.
    But if I load a jpeg, crop it, and save it, there’s nothing being lost that would be captured in the xcf.

    I know, if that’s all I’m doing, use another program.
    I’ve been using The GIMP for many many years, for all sorts of things from simple to quite complex.  I wrote plugins, and I’ve promoted it to other people.  And now, the developers are pretty much giving me a great big f-u.
    That’s what’s really upsetting: the attitude. Some guy in a nice shirt says “professional use”, and that’s that for the current user base.  “If you want to do something that’s not complex, go away and learn another program.”

    :-(

  14. >>Let me see if I got it right and please tell me if I got it wrong.

    >>You personally don’t like some of the changes.

    Yeah, I’m the only guy who doesn’t like it. 

    >>Therefore free software teams must be consisting of just developers without training in public relations. They also must be not talking to actual users but rather anticipating their needs and ultimately getting it wrong.

    >>Is that the idea you have?

    Well, this was my view before this release.  This is just another example.

    But they didn’t talk to actual users, did they? 

    >>In 2006 the team sat down with Peter Sikking of man + machine interface works and came up with a project vision (previously lacking) that basically says:

    >>We want GIMP to be a tool used by professionals who work on complex projects.

    >>This is our target audience, and it has certain workflows.

    >>We want to change GIMP to honor those workflows.


    I’m not making this up, you know.

  15. @Jamie, You know, it’s amazing. Every once in a while someone understands this as an f-u, when none was meant. There’s got to be some explanation for that.

    @Ugglybabee “But they didn’t talk to actual users, did they?” — I wonder how you came to this conclusion. Let me guess. “They didn’t talk to me, and I don’t like it, therefore they didn’t talk to actual users, did they?” — something like that? :)

    “I’m not making this up, you know.” — I don’t quite understand the point you are trying to make with that quote. Could you please elaborate?

  16. I feel for those who *have* contributed to the furtherance of GIMP in tangible ways, only to see “their” software - one tends to feel a bit that way when one contributes to something, else, why contribute?? - go in a direction they deplore, and when trying to discuss it with the core developers are met with derision and disrespect.

    At the end of the day, though, this is the core development team’s product, and if they chose to turn it into a video game or a vertical-market app or whatever, that is their choice. Fortunately, there *is* a choice: all is not lost. GIMP *is* Open-Source. This fact makes me grateful to the core development team of GIMP… and if we don’t share their vision, we do have the choice to do something about it. I have pay-for software (niche-market: 3D figure tool) where development suddenly took a very strange turn and since it was closed-source, we were left with lumpy oatmeal. So, thank you developers of GIMP for giving us that option.

    Hoping to stay tuned to both Win8 adoption and GIMP adoption to see how things pan out. :D

  17. @Alexandre: Thanks for the response.  It is not the export feature that has me most upset, it’s what appears to be the developer’s attitude that the current user base is unimportant.

    Here are some thoughts:
    - I am under the impression that professional graphic artists use Photoshop. There is *nothing* else.
    - I would think that a professional knows the difference between a PNG and an XCF.  I know I do!  If I type “image.png” into the save dialog, I actually did it on purpose!

  18. @Jamie Disagreement doesn’t equal to f-u. Targeting a specific user group doesn’t mean considering a different group of users unimportant. I don’t know how else to explain these pretty basic concepts.

  19. Let’s go back to basics then:
    - Many existing users find this new ‘feature’ annoying and a step backwards in usability.
    - The developers won’t listen to this feedback because they are targeting a different user group, stating that users not in their target group should use some other program.

    I think that seems to sum up many of the comments posted here.

    At any rate, I have installed a save-clean plugin for 2.8, from http://shallowsky.com/software/gimp-save/

    I think that plugin needs to be moved into the plugin registry, so it can be tracked to see how popular it becomes.

  20. @Jamie

    1) “The developers won’t listen to this feedback” — won’t listen or won’t change? That’s not the same thing at all.

    2) “stating that users not in their target group should use some other program” — Nope. It’s just one of the suggested choices.

  21. The dramatic change of the save/export thing has made Gimp 2.8 unusable for my workflow.

    I use Gimp to carry out tasks such as simple photo editing, cropping, resizing. Now I have to find another program for that.

    After +5 years of Gimp usage I must say good bye and best of luck with your new audience.

  22. Now I am coming to see the problem and if I understand it right I think this change of “focus” will forever doom GIMP to it’s niche status.
    Correct me if I am wrong but looks like The GIMP is to be targeted exclusively to digital artists and other original work creators which is a niche within the “professional” graphics niche.
    People in other graphics professional niches are expected to move on. So web site guys, prepress guys are out now along with anyone else who deals in a high volume image editing.
    Never mind the prosumer segment, they are right out.
    This saddens me.
    Over the years as new work-flows emerged, Adobe has always been quick to cater to these new works flows. As time goes by Photoshop becomes more and more useful in more and more contexts.
    But on The GIMP side the choice appears to be to reduce the number of workflows GIMP accommodates.
    I think this is a bad strategy and personally disappointing to me because I have always held hopes that The GIMP might one day work it;s way into my Niche, prepress. But if this course is held that will never be.
    It’s a shame.

  23. Well, I’m sure they know some people who are users, but mostly they talked to this guy.  Check out that picture!

    http://mmiworks.net/aboutus/peter.html

    “Peter Sikking is a leading user interaction architect. He runs high‐profile interaction design projects for clients ranging from blue‐chip multi­nationals to startups.

    A pioneer of methods emphasising product vision and value delivery, he is known for swiftly getting to the heart of the matter and focusing his team on solving the real problem.

    He teaches and mentors a next generation of interaction architects. His contribution to the user interaction industry and open‐source projects form the basis for his publications and lectures.”

     

  24. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 4:40 am

    @Ugglybabee

    I’m afraid you still don’t get the picture. Peter doesn’t fetch the specs out of blue. He evaluates actual workflows by talking to real users. That’s his job. Literally.

  25. I feel like Alexandre is provoking me into being more argumentative than I might be otherwise.  Maybe he feels the same way about me.

    I appreciate the use of xcf file as a default.  I’m using the format more, and I’m often glad that I do.  If this was a default instead of a lockdown, I could get behind this.

    It doesn’t matter who, or how many people they talked to, the real problem with GIMP 2.8 is that it was “changed to honor those workflows.”

    For a complex application with many features, I don’t believe that you can anticipate the workflow of every user, or even every “serious” user.  I think it’s a wrongheaded approach.  You need to make the tool usable, and let the user create his/her own workflow.  This is especially true for artists.

    Well, my opinion doesn’t matter much, but this is a good example of why I can’t reccomend Linux to my friends any more.  GIMP has been marketed to general users since I started using Linux ten years ago.

  26. Here’s a tip, by the way.  In Linux, you can open Gimp at the command line.  Like I said, I open 10 windows at a time like this

    $gimp 222*

    This opens 2220.jpg, 2221.jpg, 2222.jpg, 2223.jpg, 2224.jpg, 2225.jpg, 2226.jpg, 2227.jpg, 2228.jpg, 2229.jpg

    I change all ten images, export them (ctrl-f, w, enter)

    and then I return to the terminal window, and hit ctrl-c.  This closes all ten windows without the incredibly aggravating CLOSE WITHOUT SAVING?  dialogue.

    I’m sure it works with just one window.  Open Gimp at the command line and you can close it at the command line without the annoying dialogue.

  27. anything that makes my work flow easier is a good thing.  if it makes it more difficult ... well, it makes it more difficult.  i used the new flow for thousands of edits and still stumble a lot but am working it out.  still its not a welcome change for most of my work.  the machine should be doing the work for me, not me having to accommodate the machine.  XCF is not a finished distributable output.  it is an interim result for an ongoing project.  its never my final product. professionals are certainly not the ones that will chose the wrong output if given a choice.  still i look to see a redeeming virtue.  the developers have given me a wonderful editor and i should have faith that eventually this will be shown to be beneficial somehow, or will be changed for the better. for now i am pro choice.

  28. In the 90s at my college, the students who couldn’t afford photoshop would go for paint shop pro. In the 2000s they had all migrated to linux and gimp. last term I saw an increase in students taking a deep breath and buying photoshop on student loan despite the economy. I took a poll in my classes last week: 0/300. Compared with the 2000s: 273/300. I asked why and the reason was unanimous: Save/Export is a time wasting f**k-up.

    Shows to me that the gimp team have screwed up big time. Sudents become professionals and if they are being turned off as students, there is no hope for gimp in any workflow.

  29. “Students become professionals and if they are being turned off as students, there is no hope for gimp in any workflow.”

    Rather compelling point. I’m still trying to figure out exactly how Peter Sikking’s principles apply to workflow… I’m sure they must. I’m definitely not an efficiency expert.

    Mind you, where I worked before (RN in a cath lab doing angiograms), the hospital hired an efficiency expert to analyse our movements in order to make our workflow more efficient (and be able to cut staffing costs: poorly-hidden agenda). End of the day, he got in our way, making us less efficient. They ended up sacking a few people, which positions they had to fill again in short order. Seems the efficiency expert’s formulas didn’t mesh real well with the real world. :-/

  30. “Peter doesn’t fetch the specs out of blue. He evaluates actual workflows by talking to real users. That’s his job. Literally.”

    But who chose those real users from where the information he got came?

    If the users do not represent the average Gimp user then Peter’s opinions do not apply to the average user.

  31. At the end of the day, though, people, let’s remember: This Is Open Source.

    With Open-Source software, you become part of a community. With closed-source, you remain a customer.
    —Community member.
    —Customer.
    Each has distinct identifying characteristics and mindset. Unfortunately, people new to Open-Source come in with a “Customer” mindset. They don’t “get” Open-Source. They don’t see themselves as part of a community. And so, you get customer-like complaints and criticism of innovations and design decisions of… geez, free-to-download software. What do you want: your money back???

    Indeed, proponents for *Closed-Source* software are usually much more adamant adherents to… what, exactly? They’ll staunchly defend an OS developer as if they’d been paid to do so, as if their life and credibility and honour depended on it, they will dismiss valid objections and glaring issues with the OS or software as trivial and nit-picking all the while castigating Open-Source enthusiasts as being cult-like.
    And yet, these people are customers: they have a closed-source product. They have no access to anything: they can’t change the code, tailor the build, tweak the behaviour… nothing.

    We of the Open-Source community need to find a more community-like spirit, less of a customer-mindset, showing gratitude for those who *have* invested time and energy into products we use daily, and if we don’t like new visions of these developers for upcoming versions of their products, realise that the software *is* Open-Source.

    Am I the only human that sees this????

  32. @Robyn - you are correct but..

    In the open source community, there are many more users than capable programmers. As a consequence the ‘users’ contribute by offering suggestions, filling in bug reports, creating documentation etc.,

    In this case, it seems that the core Gimp programmers have turned to a professional, the majority of whose experience (in spite of Open Source Claims) originates in closed source strategies. As a consequence, he has recommended a lock-down of the programme into a proprietary format with the intention of forcing the community to adapt or FO. And the important thing here is that the user-base IS a community, not a customer-base. As a consequence the recommendations that the Gimp programmers have listened to are wrong.

    The community feels slighted because it is not being listened to after all the effort it has put into the programme. Instead of having a dialogue, the community is getting the ‘adapt or go’, with no real discourse other than “we hired in a professional who has identified our target user and we are now targeting that user.” Which isn’t of course reasonable discourse.

  33. Jon, I agree. Your point is quite valid: the community member “End User” is equally as important as the developer in Open-Source, if only because often they can be one and the same.

    Thank you for that valuable perspective. :)

  34. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 2:13 pm

    @Jon “The community feels slighted because it is not being listened to…” — nope :)

    1) because it thinks it is not being listened to;
    2) and, above all, it’s only part of the community.

  35. If that last statement seems obscure, allow me to elaborate: I am developing and VBA-Excel based asset-management tool. I created it for me, but I’m trying to make it reasonably intuitive to use for non-computer-savvy people in charge of assets in their department. So, I realise that whilst my workflow inspires behaviour of the program, others might find my way of working awkward and not to their liking. So, to that end, I’m soliciting the help of these people for suggestions and ideas on how *they* would like to see it work.

    I do love the Open-Source concept heaps!

  36. @Alexandre

    Perhaps you can furnish us with some statistics.

    How many of the community have said “Bad Move” and how many have said “Good Move”?

    If the majority of feedback is ‘bad’ and the response continues to be ‘get used to it’, then that equates to ‘not being listened to’ not ‘think they are not being listened to’.

    My guess is that your “only part of the community” is actually the largest part of the community and this is being validated by my discussions with the community I am aware of, which is large. The message I am getting is that they are unanimously saying ‘Bad Move’ and since they have all told me that the response they got to their comments was ” get used to it or use something else”, not “we’ll take your comments into consideration”, as far as I am concerned that confirms my statement of ‘not being listened to’.

    I teach on a course with 300 students, the college has 11 courses which all use, to some extent, graphics programmes. We have a student base ranging from 100 - 300 per course on those courses. In total we have some 2,500 students requiring graphics programmes, a great deal of whom in the 2000s were Gimp evangelists. In the 2000s, 273 out of 300 in my classes used Gimp, so factored up that is around 2000 in the college out of 2500 in the 2000s.

    Today, my colleagues report that they haven’t encountered one Gimp user who is on 2.8. So far, quizzing the other lecturers, I have a tally of 8 students keeping to 2.6, because they don’t like the ‘improvements’ of 2.8 and all of the students on my 2nd year course have migrated to Photoshop and have done it for the same reason.

    Out of interest, one of my students is an urbex and a brilliant reportage photographer. He has just published a book which was originally to have been prepared entirely in Gimp, with a credit to such in the book. He was so annoyed at the response he got from Gimp that he threw it out and purchased Photoshop.

    The book sold out on Amazon on the day of release. It has just gone into its 5th imprint (50,000 books) and could have been a good proof of Gimp’s capability, but it wasn’t. It is now yet another in a long line of books proving Photoshop’s capability and why Gimp will never capture any ground from it, because they are being blinkered and worse than that, have become agenderised and won’t listen to their community.

  37. I will put my 30+ years of graphics experience up against some free lance “user interaction architect” any day of the week.
    If this is what Peter Sikking recomends to the GIMP developers then I would assert the man knows nothing about the graphic arts, at all.
    His site reads like he is another jargon slinging hack who is better at selling ideas to clueless CEOs than someone who actually has anything of value to offer. All to often guys like Sikking are drawn to doing things differently simply to put their mark on a project, not to actually make it better.

  38. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 3:46 pm

    @Robyn “Am I the only human that sees this????” — it’s what I’ve been talking about since day one. And I don’t think it’s very nice to take one case, where developers disagree with a part of the community, and make it look like it’s what they always do.

    GIMP devs actually have a blog, http://gimp-brainstorm.blogspot.com where, the GUI team has been publishing ideas that users send them since 2007. Five years of not listening, eh?

    @Jon “How many of the community have said “Bad Move” and how many have said “Good Move”?” — there, you are trying to generalize again, while I’m talking about segmentation :) Sorry, it’s not going to work.

    @InkKnife Oh really? Do you also mind the single-window mode? The combined lasso + polygonal selection tool? Other UI changes? Because most of them come from Peter.

  39. @Alexandre

    Yes I fully see what you mean by Segmentation, you are hiding behind Obscuranto. You believe that by jargonising you will convince us. Well, it won’t work.

    Answer the question:

    Of the feedback you have received, how many people think that the Save/Export strategy is a good idea and how many think it is a bad idea.


    This is a simple binary statistic which can be extracted from the feedback you have received, so what is the answer?

    From the people I have discussed this with, the statistic I can provide is that of the 300+ people sampled by me, 100% think it is a bad idea.

    Now lets see your statistics, or would you prefer to continue obfuscating?

  40. And my 30+ years of Art and book-design, considered:

    No, I don’t like single window mode, since my system has two monitors, I can’t keep the graphic maximised on one window and the toolkit on the other. But then I can set that as an option in preferences and continue to use my streamlined workflow. I can’t do the same with the badly thought out Save/Export strategy.


    Combined lasso Might be useful sometime, but so far, I have used other techniques to achieve the same ends which work more accurately and faster.

    Polygonal selection tool - suppose it will be useful for someone, not me.

    Other UI changes, well its just a bit of tinkering around and not that important, that refined or that streamlined.


    No, the issue that annoys all of the users I have spoken to is the Lockdown on xcf and the save/export issue, which is ill-considered and a bad move. That one issue marks Peter out as a closed-source-minded hack who has no idea of workflows.

    I can now work faster producing a master using a Graves Camera, Lettraset and Cow-Gum than I can using Gimp. To me, that is a retrograde step.

  41. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 4:31 pm

    @Jon I don’t think we can have a constructive discussion. I’m getting tired of explaining that I can’t equal people who are not target audience to people who are. I don’t know the background of every person who said they didn’t like the new behavior. I do know, though, that most people who liked it are in the “prosumer” and pro segment (3D related work, video editing, photography, graphic design etc.). Noone can draw sane, credible statistics out of that. It needs a study, which is exactly what the team asked to back up any claims about community wishes with.

  42. >>I’m getting tired of explaining that I can’t equal people who are not target audience to people who are.

    And how that’s not an FU?  I can see how that would be tiring.

  43. “I do know, though, that most people who liked it are in the “prosumer” and pro segment (3D related work, video editing, photography, graphic design etc.).”

    Does that mean that Gimp is moving more in the direction of a “client base” than in the direction of a “community”?

    I ask because I have never seen a professional using Gimp, not even the ones that are pro Open Source.

  44. >I’m getting tired of explaining that I can’t equal people who are not target audience to people who are.

    Wow, I can’t believe you actually said that!  No way this is going to get better; I should leave now.

  45. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 5:17 pm

    @Ugglybabee: “And how that’s not an FU?” — do I really have to say again that you are overreacting?

    “Wow, I can’t believe you actually said that!” — I have no doubt that you read words. But I do have every doubt that you actually understood their meaning. How can I help you stop looking for offences?

    @Artur Pires: Client base? Absolutely not :) Every application has a certain target audience. There’s always a limit to what a developer is willing his application to become.

    “I ask because I have never seen a professional using Gimp, not even the ones that are pro Open Source.” — start with http://www.davidrevoy.com :)

  46. @Alexandre

    Yes I know Alexandre how tiring it can be for you trying to construct solid arguments when you have no statistics to leverage your case and you are tired of repeating hackneyed hollow arguments that have no foundation. I have students who get tired of doing it all the time with me when they are trying to get me to up their marks. I only pass students who have done their homework, not those who try to flannel. Still it is a valiant attempt on your part, stick to your guns. I am sure someone will believe you eventually. Just not me.

    Because, I have spent 30+ years designing and producing books (that is ‘Graphic Design’ in case you didn’t know), working as a commercial photographer and I have been teaching the subject as a visiting lecturer in Graphic Design for 20 years.

    I would suggest therefore, with all due respect, that since I am a Graphic Designer and Commercial Photographer, I AM your target audience, and I am saying that that the Save/Export Strategy is a bad idea.

    As your last message stated:

    “I don’t think we can have a constructive discussion. I’m getting tired of explaining that I can’t equal people who are not target audience to people who are.”

    Absolutely confirms that you are not listening to your user base, and the fact that you are not listening to me, a part of your ‘Target Audience’, merely proves you are not listening to anybody.

    You remind me of the story of the Oozelum Bird that flies round and round in an ever decreasing circle until it disappears up its own ass.

    You can keep going round and round in circles making incoherent obfuscations until Gimp disappears because it has lost all users, or you can start listening to what people are saying, make corrections and get it back on track. That is the simple and stark choice.

    I would advise Gimp strategists to start listening to ALL users and not just their new ‘Target Audience’ because as a member of the supposed ‘Target Audience’ the profession isn’t interested in an upstart programme that has made recent badly thought out changes, especially when there is so much good commercial material on the market. And material, I hasten to add, which listens to its users, no matter who they are.

    Photoshop and Autodesk have both been seen to implement suggestions made by their users, and listen to the feedback of all of their users, not just a ‘Target Audience’.

    In other words, with these companies, no one is too small to ignore. You on the other hand are ignoring 100% of your users in order to go after a 0% of ‘Target User’.

    Apart from a few web-based ProAms, you aren’t reaching the audience you want, and never will because you are already showing yourself up as ‘not listening’.

     

     

  47. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 6:42 pm

    Jon, you spent so much time writing that I’m bound to ask whether you had any time to do some reading of what you commented on. Because, unfortunately, there’s no sign of that.

    You completely missed the GUI brainstorm blog reference, and you didn’t even try to understand the meaning of a statistical research as in “having a methodology” and not as in “banging some arbitrary numbers together until they break”.

    If you refuse to read and understand what you comment on, we cannot have a civil conversation. And if we can’t have one, I dare say we better have none at all.

  48. >>How can I help you stop looking for offences?

    Honestly, I don’t see any offense.  Gimp doesn’t owe me anything.

  49. @Alexandre

    Conversely I am bound to ask if you took the time to understand what I am saying. It seems you spent the intervening time working out how to be a smart alec rather than taking the time to read it.

    I did not miss the brainstorm blog reference and I did not miss understanding the meaning of statistical research as in “Having a Methodology”.

    But you are failing to understand that you can draw ancillary statistics from your feedback, and according to the statistics I have gathered, Gimp has made a mistake.

    You are not listening because you don’t appear to want to listen and you are covering this by saying:

    1) such statistics are meaningless, which they are not

    2) You can’t quantify the statistics because you don’t know if they are coming from your user base, who you don’t want to listen to, or from your target audience, who when the truth is told, don’t give a damn about you because they have Photoshop.

    3) The people giving negative comment are only a (in your words) “part of the community”. By my statistics an extremely large part of the community.

    So when it boils down, you:

    1) have a vision and won’t be swayed

    2) Haven’t got the statistics to back up your vision, but hey! you’ll just cover that by a load of Bull

    3) Probably have the statistics that proves the mistake but still don’t want to admit it, so are covering up by flanneling about methodologies.

    4) Have alienated your Userbase while chasing after an audience that don’t want you.

    5) Haven’t got the balls to admit the mistake and keep covering up with more Bull (ever thought of Politics?)

    If you refuse to read and understand, there is no hope for the programme. Gimp is going Oozelum, all I am waiting for now is to hear the pop.

  50. It seems to me that we’ve established what’s what here.

    Alexandre has made it clear that some users are more equal than others.  We’re basically arguing over whether its an FU or not.

    Users should listen to developers when they say that this isn’t intended as an FU.

    Developers should listen to users when they say that it feels like an FU.

    No one is lying, and no one is wrong.

    If Alexandre speaks for developers, he’s not exactly proving me wrong when I say that developers tend to be unskilled at public relations, but we’re all going to get better at this as time goes by.  Well, maybe not Alexandre.


    Its true what I said about big lurching development changes are a big reason why I’ve stopped recommending Linux to my everyday friends.  Gimp has been marketed to general users for ten years, and this change in focus is painful for much of the general community.

    But this sort of thing does happen.  Gnome 3 is a pretty sweet desktop, IMO, I like it, and I use it often… but it isn’t the ideal “starter” Desktop for new Linux users that Gnome 2 was.  Eventually, one of the Gnome 2 forks may emerge, but it feels like an important hole has opened up in the software support for the general Linux community.

    Here’s how I see it: The developer’s prerogative to develop is absolute, but the user has every right to complain.  People are dependent on this stuff, and the pain of forced change is real.  I’m hoping that we can be respectful, at least most of the time.

  51. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 10:04 pm

    @Jon “I did not miss the brainstorm blog reference” — Ah, so you dismissed it? :)

    You see, the process of interaction with users in the project involves talking to all kinds of users. Bugs get fixed thanks to reports of pretty much everybody, things get adjusted for the benefit of even “common” users.

    What’s happening here is that you are using one single case of disagreement as a “proof” that devs are “not listening” to users, while dismissing the vast majority of actual work with any kinds of users that’s actually taking place. It’s so easy to paint black and white, ain’t that so, Mr. Farley? :)

    It looks like you do not wish to have a civil conversation after all. Well, too bad.

    OTOH, if you feel like leaving a few more nasty comments, be my guest. I don’t particularly approve of trolling here, but freedom of speech is such a wonderful thing. You can do your worst, Jonathan, you leave it for everyone to see and judge, and you can’t delete it.

  52. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 10:31 pm

    @ugglybabee

    “Alexandre has made it clear that some users are more equal than others.” — I suggest you look up the meaning of the word “targeting” in a marketing dictionary. I’m afraid the conversation is meaningless until you do that, and until you understand the definition completely.

    Yes, the “common” workflow is the secondary workflow, and in certain ways less comfortable than before. No, it doesn’t mean that you are worse than the target audience, nor does it mean that you are “less equal”. The decision wasn’t meant to make anybody feel bad.

    Yet for some reason quite a few people take the change as a personal insult and just won’t listen to careful explanations even after a detailed article and over 150 comments.

    We (I speak as a team member at the moment) have already publicly stated that we are sorry that it caused discomfort for some users. But the decision is ours to make and the responsibility is ours to take.

  53. No I dismissed the Brainstorm blog because the brainstorming on this issue was concluded long before any of the users got wind of the change, therefore retrospective feedback was the only possible method of interacting for the majority of the users and it is being ignored.

    I am quite willing to have a civil conversation and I am not Trolling, I am trying to get you to understand that a significant portion of your user base do not approve of this one recent change. Whereas it doesn’t significantly affect the workflow you want to achieve, it significantly affects other workflows that people are already using the programme for.

    If you think that my comments are nasty, I am sorry, but perhaps you should also look at the tone of your responses, which appear equally disrespectful:

    “I’m getting tired of explaining”

    “you spent so much time writing that I’m bound to ask whether you had any time to do some reading of what you commented on. Because, unfortunately, there’s no sign of that.”

    каждое действие имеет равное реакция Александр

  54. Alexandre Prokoudine 29 November 2012 at 10:45 pm

    @Jon I actually sent your first long-ish comment to Peter (those evil developers don’t listen to users, eh?), and the reply I got from him was “Although I am not afraid to revisit the whole design again, I must say that there are plenty of target users who instantly get it, or get it after a few weeks.”.

    As for the last part, I’m not going to argue about action/counteraction, because if you use a polite reply as an excuse for aggression, I can only guess what else you are capable of. Plus, frankly, it’s boring, and it’s not getting us anywhere.

  55. Mac_Usability_not_thanks 29 November 2012 at 11:12 pm

    I’m sorry, but I don’t like the new behaviour.

  56. I suggest you look up the meaning of the word “targeting” in a marketing dictionary. I’m afraid the conversation is meaningless until you do that, and until you understand the definition completely.

    http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/mkt/dictionary/result.php?term=t*

    Okay, I looked it up, and it doesn’t exactgly seem to be in there.  This conversation is still meaningless, same as it’s always been.

    You said:

    >I’m getting tired of explaining that I can’t equal people who are not target audience to people who are.

    And that is why I said:

    “Alexandre has made it clear that some users are more equal than others.”

    Orwellian misuse of “equal” notwithstanding, That’s a pretty straightforward rephrasing of what you said, and it’s clearly the way it is.  Target users do not equal nontarget users, according to Alexandre.  A deeper understanding of the meaning of “target users” isn’t going to change that.

    You keep asserting this, and when people repeat it back to you, you say they don’t get it.  You’ve done this again and again and again.

    And I’m guessing that, after reading this, you’re going to do it one more time.

     

     

  57. I’m sure that “plenty of target users who instantly get it, or get it after a few weeks.”, but don’t you think that “get it after a few weeks” is not as good as “get it after a few days”?

    Doesn’t that mean something?

  58. This discussion has been interesting. Thanks to both Alexandre and Jon (and UggleeBabee) I have a better grasp of the direction GIMP is going. The graphics artists I talk to have long ago dismissed GIMP as a serious tool, even when I extolled its virtues. Now that the workflow has been compromised, for simple things I’ll use GIMP 2.6 - it still works well.
    For real work, I’m glad I invested in Photoshop.

    Whilst I have an overwhelming love and loyalty for Open-Source, I also maintain my power of choice. When Ubuntu decided on Unity, I went over to Mint. There are choices for everything you do, even as a developer. I’m only surprised that a team developing an app with such a tiny (compared to PS) market penetration chose to make such an odd decision to alienate so many loyal users.
    Odd, that.

  59. >>“Although I am not afraid to revisit the whole design again, I must say that there are plenty of TARGET users who instantly get it, or get it after a few weeks.”


    Well, sure!  If they didn’t get it, they wouldn’t be TARGET users, right?  LOL!

  60. Let me sum up, because at this point I just feel like I’m provoking Alexandre for my own amusement.

    Like I said, I’ve developed a workaround.  Open and close gimp from the terminal window, and you can bypass the “close without saving” nonsense. 

    Using XCF format more, and I see the virtue in it. If Gimp saved as XCF by default, I’d consider it a good idea, and I don’t see how it wouldn’t honor whatever workflow they’re trying to honor, but they’ve completely removed “save as” for any other format.

    Or how about adding an “export and close” option?

    I don’t accept that gumming up my workflow is necessary to honor someone else’s, but I do accept that I’ve had to change my workflow.  Life goes on.  I’m just here to see how dug in Alexandre is going to get.

  61. Alexandre Prokoudine 30 November 2012 at 1:01 am

    @Artur It’s few days for some, and few weeks for others. For me it was like 2 or 3 days. At the same time, it took me months to become comfortable with Git after SVN. Does it make Git a worse product? Should Git developers listen to SVN users and provide a behavior switch? (Coincidentally bzr has an optional SVN-like workflow, and I never liked bzr :))

    @Robyn I don’t know why it’s surprising. Are you familiar with photography market? It’s like this: photographers work within a certain price range. If all goes well, and a professional feels like (s)he can go further, set a higher price and do a more complex work, (s)he does it. But it means (s)he cannot take cheaper project anymore (shooting a $20K wedding, then going for a $2K one is nonsense). It doesn’t mean that the photographer is alienating his/her former market. It’s just moving on.

    Once you decide that you take a particular direction, you cannot tear yourself into pieces and try to please everybody.

    For years GIMP didn’t have any particular direction. People just offloaded code they had, and so it was for everybody and nobody. Try googling for reviews of versions prior to 2.4, especially the ones that mentioned the former cropping tool that had a floating dialog to confirm cropping — people just hated it, with tons of exclamation marks.

    When Peter joined the team in 2006 and worked with them on the project vision, rectangular selection tools was his first assignment. The handy active zones that you see now in rectangular/elliptic selection tools and the cropping tool are the result.

    And you know what happened next? Other projects started copying this feature. The first one was Hugin which uses this concept for cropping in panorama preview. The next one was darktable. And there are few more apps that implemented it just like in GIMP.

    Why did it happen? Because the team defined the target audience they wanted to make GIMP comfortable for and started systematically working towards it.

    I’ve yet to see someone who complained about the newer cropping tool or the combined lasso/polygonal selector or other things Peter designed. Oh, the alienation of users :)

    @ugglybabee “...but they’ve completely removed “save as” for any other format.” — it depends on what you are trying to achieve. For saving into a new lossy file format and switching to it just use “Export…” once and then overwrite. From the standpoint of XCF being the central file format it makes a perfect sense.

  62. >>@ugglybabee “...but they’ve completely removed “save as” for any other format.” — it depends on what you are trying to achieve. For saving into a new lossy file format and switching to it just use “Export…” once and then overwrite. From the standpoint of XCF being the central file format it makes a perfect sense.

    For crying out loud, THIS TIME, will you please read this?

    Yes, that’s what I do, but it’s not quite that simple, because when I close the window, I get a dialogue that says “Do you want to close without saving?”

    I can’t begin to explain how disruptive it is to my workflow to get a “close without saving” dialogue when I’ve already saved my work. It tears at my guts. I could get used to it, but do I really want to?

    But I have solved the problem, by opening Gimp at the command line.  After exporting, I can close Gimp in the terminal window, and the dialogue won’t come up.

  63. This was my trouble too but it is possible to turn the “Do you want to close without saving?” dialog off somewhere in the settings. I’m now able to work in a way that is OK just using ctrl-E to save rather than ctrl-S.

  64. Alexandre Prokoudine 30 November 2012 at 1:42 pm

    @Ugglybabee

    I can’t begin to explain how disruptive it is to my workflow to get a “close without saving” dialogue when I’ve already saved my work.

    I already mentioned in the mailing list that better ideas are welcome.

  65. First I would like to apologize for the tone of my prior post. Tired and grumpy from a long day in the pressroom is my only defense.
    I actually quite like every other change in 2.8 but the save change is just such a show stopper the good is kinda over shadowed.

    Help me understand how the new save scheme helps a certain group, any group.
    If an artist sits down to Photoshop and creates a complex graphic, layers, paths, etc, and goes to save it she will be presented with a save as dialogue that will default to .psd and she can save. No hassle there.
    If a graphics pro opens a customer supplied .tif, makes a minor levels adjustment then crops it and resizes it then saves as he is presented with a dialogue that defaults to .tiff and easily saves his work. Again no problem.
    Now we all know that any changes are handled in Photoshop’s native language but that is transparent to the user.
    Here is the thing, someone dealing with complex graphics gets a great work flow in Photoshop and so does the high volume photo editor. Neither looses anything.
    But with the new save scheme on the GIMP I don’t see how the complex graphics person gains anything they didn’t already have but the graphics editor looses.
    I am not averse to change. Heck, I jumped from 100% Mac at home to 100% Linux last year so I am capable of dealing with change. I just keep looking at this change, reading the arguments, hopeing for that “ah ha” moment when I see the GIMP devs side of it.
    But try as I may this makes no sense to me. I don’t see any advantage here for any user.
    Honestly I want to like what you guys do. GIMP is a great free tool and I mean to be constructive. I have been in professional graphics for 30 years and I think this is a mistake. That is not a complaint, that is data you should consider. You say you target pros yet I see pros disagreeing with you.

  66. Quoted for aggreement ... to paraphrase:

    I personally jumped from 95% Win7 to 99% Linux Mint 13… been there for almost two years. With all that I’ve learned to do - including compiling my own copy of Blender from svn, I feel that I, like InkKnife, am capable of dealing with change: I embrace it if the outcome is an improved workflow.
    However, trying time and again to reconcile myself to this change, reading other user’s statements and rationale for liking it, feeling a strong resonance with those providing reasons why the mechanism doesn’t work for them but yet still try-try-trying, hoping for that “ah ha, *THAT’s why it works best!” moment when I finally see the vision the GIMP developers had creating it… and failing. The only possible reason that makes sense to me why this was included was to push the xcf format. No other reason comes close to making sense. Indeed, for something as generic a task as editing open-format files such as .jpg and .tiff and .png you would expect to default save to the original format. It’s like bringing up a text file in some plain text editor - like, say, NotePad++ and having it default to saving to a .npp format or something.
    Yes, Blender saves to .blends. Excel saves to .xls. Poser saves to .pz3s. But image formats are a bit like plain-text format: you don’t expect your editor to dictate what format you’re going to save to and make saving to your format of choice awkward and time-consuming.

    “I don’t see any advantage here for any user.”

    Perhaps Peter can shed some light here how this might actually be beneficial to someone whose intent is to do a quick touch-up edit on a png file. It seems like the GIMP development team are intent on restricting workflow to their way and their way only, making any other workflow unnecessarily convoluted through design change. Restricting workflow options diminish software flexibility resulting in a narrow target market.

    Is that what you want?

  67. Alexandre Prokoudine 01 December 2012 at 8:02 am

    @InkKnife

    You say you target pros yet I see pros disagreeing with you.

    And I see even non-pros agreeing with us. So who’s right and who’s wrong? :)

    Personally I tend to think that it’s neither, and yet, both.

    Consider this: on average, the negative/positive comments ratio on social networks and in blogs is ca. 3/1 (I can explain where the number comes from, if you wish). That means, by default you will see a lot of negative stuff piling up, and a lot less positive stuff.

    The previous time someone brought up the topic on the mailing list and started yet another series of misplaced accusations, people who loved the change just started showing up one by one, and the person eventually cooled down after being proven wrong. Here’s a few URLs:

    https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list/2012-August/msg00100.html
    https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list/2012-August/msg00102.html
    https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list/2012-August/msg00110.html

    Or there’s another fact. The amount of people who subscribed to GIMP’s page at Google+ (subscribed, not just +1’ed it) has grown from 7K to 20K since the release of 2.8 (the users are just abandoning GIMP, aren’t they? ;)), and these days I barely see any complains about save/export in comments. Which is different from what I saw around May. Maybe it’s not such a useful fact, but it’s a fact. I can prove it.

    I keep getting comments from 3D, NLE and other folks (with varying expertise and a bias towards prosumer/pro market) who think the change is useful. It’s another fact, and I can prove it too.

    Sure, we have this claim by Mr. Farley that ~300 students abandoned GIMP all as one. Is this information credible? Not yet. If it is, then what does it mean? We don’t know what these students actually do. We don’t know the kind of workflows they are used to. We don’t know what kind of tuition they got. We only have a claim.

    Claims are not interesting until they have lots of raw data for analysis. We have none of that.

    Once again, I don’t see a way to make any credible statistics. In my experience, someone who thinks that everything’s fine needs a really serious reasoning to express an opinion online, let alone participating in any kind of a poll. A lot of people never even tell others what software they use for their work.

    @Robyn

    The only possible reason that makes sense to me why this was included was to push the xcf format.

    What would it be good for? :D

    It’s like bringing up a text file in some plain text editor - like, say, NotePad++ and having it default to saving to a .npp format or something.

    Except image file formats are incredibly more complex than a plain text file, by order of magnitude (at the very least).

  68. >>I already mentioned in the mailing list that better ideas are welcome.

    Okay, great.

    An option for export + close would resolve all of the real world issues.  I don’t see any need to revisit the whole design.

  69. Just to add my voice to this, the new save/export feature really is clunky and complicated.  I’m more than happy to occasionally lose some layers because I saved in the wrong format.  Thats my choice and my mistake.  I can live with that.  Forcing me to go through some convoluted process and making me confirm about “unsaved images” that are actually saved really isn’t a solution.  There is surely a better way to allow me to save a jpg?  I don’t understand why the old fashioned warning about losing layers wasn’t good enough?  I can’t even force the jpg ending onto my files to override the xcf option. 

    I understand the intention but the actual implementation of this just doesn’t work.  The number of people complaining about this is proof its a bad call and the attitude of some of the developers has been unbelievably arrogant.  There _has_ to be a better way of still saving a simple image without ruining the new improved workflow for professional users.

    I use GIMP for many many things from complex mutli-layered things to a quick jpg edit, expecting me to go use something else for my simple edits but still use gimp for complex actions doesn’t make sense.  If I switch editors to something else I will switch entirely.  Surely that isn’t what the gimp developers want?  After all their hard work to produce what is otherwise an amazing editor, ruining the save process with this ill-thought feature is a real shame.  Please please fix this for the next version so we can all carry on using gimp without all this nonsense.

  70. bgoth said: “I can’t even force the jpg ending onto my files to override the xcf option.”

    That’s another confusing thing, why doesn’t the save/export dialog work the same for all actions/file types?

  71. Maybe I can give a different angle.

    The distinction between Save and Export is very defendable: .xcf files can store extra (meta) information. It is the only format that can store everything that Gimp can store.

    However, I don’t really hear anyone complaining about having to hit Ctrl+E. People are complaining about the close confirmation dialog.

    Maybe it can be viewed as a bug of the close confirmation dialog; it comes up when there are no actual changes open which are not saved (exported). If that dialog can check whether there realy is (meta) information that might got lost, it would really improve.

    And the other thing to consider is to think about auto-save. Instead of asking the user, why not autosave their changes?(and have a setting where that can be turned off for people that fear disk pollution)

  72. One more note. I am a programmer myself so let me more closely define what I consider to be the bug in the close confirmation dialog. Forgive my pseudo-math.  :)

    When the user opens a non-xcf file, a XCF project is created and the file is imported into it. Define that as state ORG.

    The user makes changes to the project so it gets a new state. Call that state NEW.

    The user exports to the same format he imported from. Call that state EXP.

    Should the confirmation dialog come up? In a perfect world, only when there are changes that might get lost. Call these CHANGES.

    CHANGES = NEW - EXP

    I consider it a bug if the dialog comes up even if CHANGES == 0.

    I think that this reasoning is valid as essentially the ‘changes’ to the initially completely empty XCF project are counted as saved after import. So apparently import affects change tracking. So it seems reasonable that the reverse also works, that the changes count as being saved after export. Otherwise, the user should start with a ‘changed’ document as well.

    Of course that’s perfect world. Probably it is too difficult to track all the features that all formats support (in order to be able to track information loss). So maybe provide an ‘autosave on export’ function…

  73. Another thing that just happened to me (yes, I keep on using Gimp, specially when I want to explain some image processing to people that I don’t know, as anyone can get Gimp).

    While exporting an image to PNG I made the wrong moves on the keyboard and ended up with a filename without extension, and I got this informative message:

    “GIMP Message

    You can use this dialogue to export to various file formats. If you want to save the image to them GIMP XCF format , use File->Save instead.”

    The funny thing is that I was not trying to save the image as a XCF, I just missed adding an extension, so GIMP, trying to be smart, added the XCF extension and then told me that I could not use it.

    I think that whole dialogue should be reviewed, as this looks to me like an incomplete change for the new “workflow”.
    (I may be wrong in the above, obviously, as I never looked at the code)

  74. There used to be a warning screen about information loss when you saved to alien formats. It had an issue. Because it is so difficult to determine wheter information loss occurred (we know it *can* happen, but did it really?) it had to be shown always.

    This dialog is removed. Thank god.

    But now, we have exact the same issue at the close confirmation dialog. It is so difficult to track whether information was lost, that we need to show it always after an export. Only when the file is saved to XCF format can we be sure no changes were lost.

    So… for the Open alien format -> Edit -> Export to alien format scenario, one dialog is gone, another popped up, no big deal.

    Except that the dialog that had to be closed was a very specific one, about the extra information that might got lost. And that it came at the moment that that loss might occur. But now it affects the general close confimation dialog and people feel afraid to learn themselves to ignore it. Because that is what we do, we learn to ignore the message boxes that don’t help us. But this one? Everyone is afraid to learn to ignore the close confirmation dialog. It’s a very bad habbit that will lead to diaster.

  75. Alexandre Prokoudine 14 December 2012 at 10:31 am

    @Artur Pires

    Saving to XCF when no file format is specifically given by the user dates back to the dawn of times. I’m not sure why that is so surprisng to anyone who’s used GIMP extensively in the last 10 years or so :) Perhaps it should be reviewed given the new workflow. I’m sure this can be discussed.

  76. I think a point that the developers have not considered is that many users of gimp have also been using adobe’s photoshop software before moving to gimp. Adobe have somehow managed to stay a “professional” level photo editing software AND retain the old “save”/“save as” method.
    People moving from photoshop to gimp are going to be confused by the new save/export system. Adobe realised this and didn’t make such a drastic change to the workflow people are used to.
    I imagine a high percentage of home users are not “professional” and would almost never deal with complex image formats such as xcf or psd. For a lot of people jpg and gif are all they know or use or need to use.

  77. Unfortunately the developers will probably never read any of the complaints people make about the new system. Developers seem to prefer to judge a success of something by how many downloads it gets, rather than actually reading feedback, because that takes time - reading a figure off a download counter is much easier.
    The problem here is that the general public are usually going to want the “latest and best” version of any software, so naturally the current release is going to receive a higher downloads count. In my experience, only the latest release of any piece of software is promoted most prominently on any download website, and finding the download link for older versions takes some extra effort on the part of the user.
    Higher downloads don’t always equate to most popular.
    I can’t say for sure, since I don’t have access to the relevant data, but I would suggest that every previous release of gimp was the “most popular” according to downloads when its version was the current one.

  78. Alexandre Prokoudine 19 December 2012 at 12:03 pm

    @BlackDalek

    People moving from photoshop to gimp are going to be confused by the new save/export system.

    Are they? So far I haven’t seen anyone saying that, while quite a few people with prior Photoshop experience said “What’s the problem? It’s how Photoshop works too”.

    I imagine a high percentage of home users are not “professional” and would almost never deal with complex image formats such as xcf or psd. For a lot of people jpg and gif are all they know or use or need to use.

    I’m not sure who would need GIF in the end of 2012, but even so, GIMP doesn’t and shouldn’t specifically target simpler workflows. Of course, you don’t have to like this decision :) You are also welcome to ignore both the secondary workflow described above and the script that restores the old behaviour to an extent :)

    Unfortunately the developers will probably never read any of the complaints people make about the new system.

    And this assumption is based on what exactly? :) Personally I read all the feedback I can get. Should I stop doing that?

    Developers seem to prefer to judge a success of something by how many downloads it gets, rather than actually reading feedback

    Neither it’s clear how you came to this conclusion.

  79. @BlackDalek

      People moving from photoshop to gimp are going to be confused by the new save/export system.

    Are they? So far I haven’t seen anyone saying that, while quite a few people with prior Photoshop experience said “What’s the problem? It’s how Photoshop works too”.
    Um, no. Photoshop doesn’t. If you open a .png and edit it and save it, it saves to .png, not .psd. If you open a .jpg, edit it and save it, it saves to .jpg, not .psd. Clearly, you don’t use Photoshop, nor do those that told you this. I know you find this incredibly difficult to believe, but there are actually a fair-few people who do find this new default behaviour of GIMP’s disconcerting and bizarre.

    Of course: “a man convinced against his will remains of the same opinion still”. Believe as you wish, but facts are facts.

  80. Alexandre Prokoudine 19 December 2012 at 2:33 pm

    @Robyn

    Clearly, you don’t use Photoshop

    Yes, I haven’t used it since CS3.

    I know you find this incredibly difficult to believe

    No, you don’t know that. You are making an incorrect assumption. What reasons you have for that — on that I’d rather not speculate.

    but there are actually a fair-few people who do find this new default behaviour of GIMP’s disconcerting and bizarre.

    Yes, there are.

  81. I use Photoshop CS3 - Photoshop’s Save does NOT behave like the new GIMP’s Save, despite what others may have told you:

    “What’s the problem? It’s how Photoshop works too”

    If you have no trouble believing them when you actually have CS3 on your PC and could verify it to see it doesn’t behave this way, then believing has become a matter of choice rather than a matter of fact. Which was the basis for my comment.

    No matter: you still have an interesting app. I wish you much luck with it.

  82. Alexandre Prokoudine 19 December 2012 at 3:22 pm

    @Robyn

    when you actually have CS3 on your PC and could verify it

    Is there a way I can help you to start reading the comments you reply and stop making all those incorrect statements? It really doesn’t help the conversation.

  83. Before this turns into any more of an argument, the point is that the new workflow (which seems well received by some people) has broken the old workflow (which has wound up a number of people myself included).  I fail to understand how we can’t have a compromise where the new workflow doesn’t break the old one.  I know what I’m talking about, I’m a software engineer by trade, making multiple flows through a peice of software isn’t rocket science and telling me I’m using it wrong because I sometimes use it as a jpeg editor really doesn’t wash.

    Without breaking the current workflow can’t it be changed to allow me to still save as JPG (with the warning if need be) if I opened a JPG or at least get the export to know I’m saving back the file I opened and not tell me I’m about to overwrite something then nag me about an unsaved image when I close it?  I can’t beleive there is no way to make the old workflow functional without breaking the new one.

    And please, dismissing me (and the hundred of other people complaining) as whingers and edge case users really just makes the developement team look like arseholes.  I am a developer, its hard work, no one ever raises their voice when something works, only when its broken, but your userbase clearly isn’t all happy, ignoring us isn’t going to help.  Please please fix this and then carry on with your (otherwise!) excellent application :-)

  84. Alexandre Prokoudine 19 December 2012 at 10:26 pm

    @bgoth

    ...then nag me about an unsaved image when I close it?

    Actually, this is likely to be taken care of. Currently it’s only in private conversations between developers. No final decision has been made yet.

    And please, dismissing me (and the hundred of other people complaining) as whingers and edge case users…

    Nobody dismisses you as an edge-case user. There is a huge amount of people who never need complex editing. The GIMP team simply doesn’t try to cater to them and suggests to either use workarounds or a different image editor. This isn’t meant to insult anybody. Hence anyone who understands it as an insult or whatever probably needs to chill out.

    ...ignoring us…

    Nobody ignores you either. You’ve been listened to, same as other unhappy users.

    However, at this point I will probably stop answering everybody who make deliberately incorrect and insulting statements towards the team.

  85. @Alexandre Prokoudine

    Good, I’m glad the unsaved image thing is going to be fixed (or at least be talking about).  I use gimp for both quick jpg editing and complex multi layer stuff, I don’t want to have to learn two different tools when gimp currently does both beautifully.

    I have no idea who is who on this (or any of the other forums) but there is plenty of people proclaiming to be speaking on behalf of the developers and then writing unhelpful comments that users should stop whining/be grateful/etc etc.  There is an impression that the developers couldn’t give a damn.  Like I say, an “impression”, I have read numerous forums about this issue before I posted here.  If the developers are taking this seriously then good, I have no intention of doing them down, I like gimp very much and I have great respect for the development team.

    I’m sure this debate would be halted in its tracks if the gimp team made some announcement to the effect of what you’ve said, something to suggest they’ve listened and acted upon it.

    It might also stop the trouble makers who enjoy posting rubbish and stiring things up.  Well maybe thats hoping for a bit too much :-)

  86. Alexandre Prokoudine 19 December 2012 at 10:47 pm

    @bgoth

    I’m sure this debate would be halted in its tracks if the gimp team made some announcement to the effect of what you’ve said, something to suggest they’ve listened and acted upon it.

    There will be at least a new, rewritten FAQ which will cover this case among first things.

  87. @Alexandre Prokoudine
    “The GIMP team simply doesn’t try to cater to them and suggests to either use workarounds or a different image editor. This isn’t meant to insult anybody.”

    Although I have not used GIMP extensively in the last 10 years or so (that’s why I was not aware of that automatic “save as XCF” feature when no extension is used), I understand why people that have used and promoted GIMP as the best free image editor feel abandoned when the answer they get is “use a different image editor”.

    After all, those users were the reason why GIMP became so popular, even the best software may remain unknown if people don’t talk about it and promote it.

  88. “...then nag me about an unsaved image when I close it?”

    “Actually, this is likely to be taken care of.”

    That would be sooo great. I think you’ll find it will stop most complaints.

    However, I also fear that taking care of that nag screen will turn out to be very difficult, as basically what you need to do to get rid of it is determine, for every single format Gimp exports to, which changed (meta) information from the current image cannot be saved in that format. For example if you have two layers and export to .jpg, Gimp has to realize that those layers cannot be saved (they have to be merged to one layer) and whether one of these layers had changes in it that would get lost if the image would be closed after that export. It is definitely possible, but probably pretty hard.

    In defense of Gimp: Microsoft Word also has never managed this. When you save to an older Word document version, it always warns you that changes might get lost, even if you just typed “Hello World” without any formatting at all. The problem is that if you track changes in some boolean flag, after a single change has been made you don’t know any longer what that change was so you have to warn the user. Only if you are able to distinguish changes that can be saved to the current format from those that cannot, can you limit the warning message to be shown only on those moments that changes really *will* get lost, instead of showing it always when changes *might* get lost.

    However, if you would just show a warning on export and after that clear the change flag, at least you would get the warning at the moment the information loss occurs and it wouldn’t be the generic close confirmation dialog users have to dismiss. Add a checkbox that says ‘I know what I’m doing, don’t warn me anymore’ and the end result might be good enough to satisfy most users.

    I sure hope you guys are able to really solve it. Gimp would behave better than most commercial software out there! But the second solution would also be great.

  89. I don’t much care about the new saving thing. Doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

    What is pissing me off is the change in brushes. It’s a nightmare.

    I mostly work with 1 pixel and 3 pixel brushes. Now they’re gone.

    Also dragging the thing is a pain in the ass when I don’t normally need anything bigger than 20 pixels. The other 980 are just taking up an annoying amount of space. Instead I have to work within a tiny, cramped space and if my finger so much as twitches wrong then I lose the number I want.

    Why couldn’t it have been on the same scale as the Opacity, 1 to 100?

    I just want my 1 pixel, 3 pixel, 5 pixel etc brushes back.

    And I’m seriously considering downgrading back to the version I had before because I loved it. It was one of the 2.6’s.

  90. Alexandre Prokoudine 03 January 2013 at 1:03 pm

    @TabletUser, are you sure you are not overreacting over a few brushes it’s fairly easy to re-add? Especially when there are projects like https://github.com/sporkbox/gimpixel?

    Also, I don’t understand the problem with setting a size value. You can use lower half of the slider for smaller increments, and you can use direct numeric input. What’s wrong with these options?

  91. Hmmm. TabletUser.  either you or i should be embarrassed on this one.  one of the great features of gimp is the continuously variable brush.  you are probably used to an old system where you had to chose a discrete brush for each size.  use the bracket keys [ and ]  to make the brush larger or smaller (right down to 1 pxl).  another gorgeous feature is the box where it says size.  if your mouse is at the top of the box then its a very coarse adjustment (click and slide). if the mouse is at the bottom of that box is a very fine adjust.  in between is just that. some of the nicest features of gimp are not available if you don’t know about them.  you can just keep experimenting and be amazed (like i do) or you can get in a group.  it would be nice to have these things written in an uncluttered way that is easily understood without hypnotizing yourself with detail.  its easy to find this stuff if you know where its at. but can take hours if you don’t even know what to call a feature.  but you can bet no matter what you are trying to do, there is a nice way to do it in gimp if you play a bit.  or do it the unexciting/unpopular way by reading the instructions. i have been using gimp for many years and am still amazed when i learn some new thing it does. version 2.82 is doing a nice job now and seems to have all the features of 2.6 plus a whole bunch more. it does slide down to 1pxl and is easy to set.

  92. I have one question? How many programs use or even recognize XCF besides gimp?

    For me opensource means not having some twit say pay me $500 to do it my way. Oh and if you ever want to see your work again, don’t upgrade. We changed our proprietary format again. Too bad you can’t save to a 3rd party standard. HAHA

    I rest my case.

  93. getting used to export my error rate for “save as” instead of export is down from 50 to 5%. after thousands of photos.  its doable.  now real world problems.  my girls & guys at the remote office have hard times adjusting.  sent hundreds of XCF files to the printer, publisher, customers even the boss. lots of nasty words. if you uploading 800 XCF files will also hose up your system. our mistake to fix.  but efforts to do that over phone and internet led to confusion.  i had to do a postmortem to see what was going wrong. 

    unfortunately office people have gotten used to ignoring the warning messages now.  if nothing else that’s fatal. they ignore legit warnings in other applications.  in gimp they would click on “restore” instead of export.  then, as they have learned, click off the warning messages losing work.  then they would export other things like documents and end up with an unintended format. a lot of confusion. 

    how about driving 140 miles to train them individually. no one wanted to to go back to PS.  (2.8.2 is just too good).  we are down to just a few complaints a week.  that is until we get new people. 

    i have many years of photo editing and graphic art under my belt,  but i have not unintentionally lost information by saving in the wrong format for most of those years.  only a few times when first starting out.  but you learn quickly.  i suspect the only pro’s that would make that mistake are the “armature professionals”

    it looks like “export” might be the work of Peter Sikking.  if that’s the case then i have to reconsider my complaint.  his contributions have been so significant to the project that its difficult to second guess him.  there must be a larger vision than we can see.

    the people in the office are not pros but they do get good.  to them, gimp is an appliance like a toaster.  they expect it to do what a toaster does .. over and over.  they don’t have the appreciation we have of this gimp work of art.  they just love it and guide it.

    the thought crossed my mind that this could be a ringer from a competitor that was trying to damage gimp but if it came from Peter Sikking or other trusted team members then i am humbled.  and apologies for my simple minded thoughts.  i know there has got to be more to the change than I am aware of so far.  i respect all that peter and the team has done, in fact in awe.  however if i (we) can contribute in any way i feel we should try.  We should make our choices known, but then accept changes that can be shown to benefit in some way. 

    here is an old engineering guideline that might be helpful. 
    “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it”

  94. “i have many years of photo editing and graphic art under my belt,  but i have not unintentionally lost information by saving in the wrong format for most of those years.  only a few times when first starting out.  but you learn quickly.  i suspect the only pro’s that would make that mistake are the ‘armature professionals’ ”...
    I’m going to assume you mean ‘amateur professionals’, Harry - of which I am one. I have used GIMP for years… have never unintentionally - or intentionally - lost information because I saved to a wrong format. This is one of those “solutions in search of a problem” enhancements. But you and I must be the oddball users - ones who pay attention to what they’re doing - for whom this ‘solution’ ... isn’t.

  95. Thanks Robyn for the correction.  Spell checkers can come up with embarrassing results when your too tired to see clearly.  Indeed i intended amateur not ‘armature professionals’ . You would think I would know better.  My daughter’s first venture into graphic art involved several copies of high density printing on a large format ink jet printer using very high quality art paper.  She laughed when she saw a word switched by the spell checker after printing all those copies.  a printing cost estimator in gimp would have been nice.  If you have been using gimp for years then I would not consider you an amateur.  You know the ropes.  My daughter, fresh out of college,  was an “amateur professional”.  She made all the mistakes that we did when we first started.  She didn’t know that high quality paper and ink for a large format printout can cost dad a car payment.  Especially when you check your work after printing all those copies.  Its the same thing with “save as”.  If you are just starting out then you might do it wrong and wish for a fix.  But after a short time you realize that could be counter productive and now you know better.  You don’t need nor want the fix unless you can clearly see a long term benefit for “you”.  Any benefit for a graphic artist just starting out,  does not justify the seemingly small but really significant change.  Nor does making the software easier to write.  That’s a one shot, although heroic, effort.  Multiply that by millions for the user experiences.  Gimp is more than just software to many loyal fans.  Its an art form,  a life long treasure worth protecting.  Teach a disadvantaged kid gimp and he or she will grow up with a talent that sets them apart.  They used to say “you will never see a boy scout robbing a gas station”.  I don’t think you will ever see a gimp proficient kid do that either.  That is, if gimp remains for the masses, not just targeted professionals.

  96. “...if gimp remains for the masses, not just targeted professionals…”
    The fact that GIMP’s developers steadfastly offer the source code along with the product gives it a precious characteristic it shares with the rest of *libre* software: it is for the people. For all. For The Community, if you follow Richard Stallman’s reasoning on why free (not no-cost, but freedom ‘free’) software is such a community-enhancing/beneficial component. Whilst I might quibble about the advisability of certain functional changes, the bottom line is that GIMP’s developers *are* continuing to develop this for all of us - not just a targeted group of people - and this sets their effort above reproach.
    Like Gnome, it make have taken a direction a lot of users disagree with. But also, like Gnome, someone else can run with it and re-design/re-fashion it more to their liking. It behoves the community to *realise* what being a free-computing community means and then be part of the solution.
    I only develop in VBA, unfortunately, though I’m learning Python. I’ve taken to porting some of my Excel-VBA solutions to Gambas, which is free and massively powerful.

    It’s all about wanting to have a play. And take ownership of our computers again! :D

  97. new Gimp is absolutely awesome BUT save is stupid
    If you have 2000 photo (sports photo: no layer, no curve, not everest photoretouch. only luma, croma and cut) you DOUBLE your retouch time.
    Time is money?
    photoshop now is economic!

    wake up children!

  98. Alexandre Prokoudine 23 January 2013 at 2:29 pm

    @Robyn, that’s the kind of attitude I was hoping to eventually see. Thanks :)

    @mac, I’m not sure why you want GIMP for quick editing of 2000 sports photos. Any decent RAW conversion tool with processing presets would beat it hands down for exactly the kind of work you are trying to do.

  99. @Alexandre

    I _think_ mac’s point is that people don’t want to use multiple image editing tools.  I use GIMP and I like it so I use it for everything from complex multi layer stuff to a quick edit of a photo.  If I have to go get another editor to do some of the those things then I have to learn two image editors not one.  Thats certainly _my_ point, finding that half of what I do is now difficult in one tool is frustrating.

    And if its really about freedom then why am I having someone elses work processes forced on me, that isn’t freedom! 

    “GIMP’s developers *are* continuing to develop this for all of us - not just a targeted group of people - and this sets their effort above reproach.” well, no it doesn’t not if they are forcing us to use a work process that we don’t want to use, that’s not freedom and our ability to express our dislike of this feature is our freedom too.  I’m all for what they are doing, they work very hard for no financial reward but that does not mean they are free to do what they want and label it “for all of us”.

    I think someone posted something (Alexandre was it you, I forget) to the effect of the developers had taken note and were fixing one the issues related to export/save.  As to whether or not they will re-allow me to “save” as jpg and leave me to lose my own work or enforce me exporting is something we will have to wait and see.

  100. Alexandre Prokoudine 23 January 2013 at 9:58 pm

    I _think_ mac’s point is that people don’t want to use multiple image editing tools.

    Luke, using a RAW conversion tool and a “big” image editor is simply a common set of skills for a professional photographer.

    As a matter of fact, among professionals it’s even common to know and understand several RAW conversion tools. E.g. on Mac it’s fairly common to use both RPP and ACR/Lightroom.

    Using GIMP for quick editing of 2,000 photos is simply counterproductive, be it 2.6 or 2.8. It’s stupid work. Complaining that an application doesn’t let you do stupid work isn’t exactly impressive :)

    “GIMP’s developers *are* continuing to develop this for all of us - not just a targeted group of people

    I’d be most grateful if you could avoid this “know it all” attitude.  You’d have to be part of the team to make such a claim.

    but that does not mean they are free to do what they want and label it “for all of us”.

    On the contrary, the team is free to do whatever they wish. That’s what the license says too. Moreover, the team didn’t put any such labels on their work. You just made that up :)

  101.  < 1 2 3 > 

Tell us what you think

Submit the word you see below: