GIMP team looking for help !!!

^If that’s what you want to happen, then who is stopping you from doing it? Go ahead.

Go to the Window menu -> Single window mode.

I got to agree, and it is a tendency in open source software.
The development teams usually consist of die hard coders. And if you got budget, it is surely not wasted on usability experts and GUI designers, running heurestic evaluations or extensive usability testing. That’s something where Adobe, Autodesk or Microsoft has whole departments for.
Most open source collaborations however start out without any gui design guideline at all, it gets a patchwork as the community of devs grows.

Personally I made some usability and GUI design courses, yet found out it is a skill in vain as all you earn is askew looks or laughter if you try to give advice and if you´r taken somewhat serious guess what? “That´s not a priority right now…”

And blender is no exception - it made it to the 21st century with the new gui and the usability got improved, however just look at the inconsistency with all the parameters.
They range from 0-100% from -5 to +5, from 0.001 to 1000, from 0-1, sometimes more activates the effect, sometimes less activates the effect - i am sure if you know the underlaying code they make perfect sense, to the user who wants to control an effect it is cumbersome if he has to read at least the tooltip for it or look up in the wiki…

I do love GIMP, and hope all the best for 2.8 but they got a lot of work to do. GUI, usability and techwise.

As a guy who was designing interfaces for Open Source projects (including MyPaint).
Here’s what happends:
Dev: You want to change it, code it.
Des: I don’t code, I design.
Dev: We’ll get to it when we feel like it.

  • There is a solution, something I’ve been saying for years -
    Coders put your keyboards down. Stop coding for free.
    Users contribute ideas.
    Ideas get quoted for work.
    Users contribute cash–if you want it, pay for it.
    Coders can pick up the job for the cash.
    Users get the features they ask for.
    Coders get support.

Coders put your keyboards down. Stop coding for free.
Users contribute ideas.
Ideas get quoted for work.
Users contribute cash–if you want it, pay for it.
Coders can pick up the job for the cash.
Users get the features they ask for.
Coders get support.
ah… this kind of mindset is little by little getting hold of the Blender community
People keeps on thinking the problems of FOSS projects can be solved with money.
I don’t think that was the original purpose of FOSS software.

If we use money as an incentive to boost development, what happens when that incentive doesn’t longer exist.
There are powerful FOSS communities (for instance Debian) that work under strictly free collaborative premises.
In fact you would get some funny remarks for a comment like that, because you would be questioning developer’s intentions.

With money you be able to solve problems that require money to be solved. You can’t use it to boost generosity, which is what fuels many communities. Also many people would make us to believe there is some kind of urgency for FOSS projects to get features done and to release, and that anyone no keeping up to Blender’s pace is a loser and sucks. This is basically a big lie.

I must be in the minority on this but where GIMP is concerned I will take features over UI any day, I would take a vastly improved brush engine and GIMP not choking on bigger images over single window GUI any day, I hope their situation regarding developers improves

It’s not about money–it’s about creating a dependent relationship between the user and the coder. Money in this day in age facilitates this bond, because it is something we can exchange.

I don’t know how well that’s working for them.

Communities are fuled by bonds. Either the bonds are weak or the bonds are strong.
What idea do you propose the ensure a harmonious relationship between users who don’t code and want features, and coders who aren’t real users?

Well, I ask myself this question: How can we harness these massive communities efficiently?
How can a coder get something concrete for his time? Most people need food and shelter to live, some need cars too. These things are bought.

This brings me to another question: How can we get developers onto FOSS projects full time?
And another: How can we compete directly with large commercial software companies?

Developers do get something out of FOSS projects, experience and a massive community to beta test their code.
What i’m seeing more and more is developers holding communities to ransom, wanting money to finish what they started.

You want to work for free for me? I can give you experience and you’ll get exposure.

If you use what I made and I change the terms so I can get the materials necessary to finish what I started so that you can use it, that’s reality. I have no obligation to you. And you have none for me. Just because a guy wants to get paid to make something means he’s holding you ransom?

Yup, beta testing code is gold dust to a developer, without it what they do would not get realised. There is a misconception that developers get nothing out of the transaction between them and the end user. Throw money into the pot and everyone might just as well save up for photoshop

Seam, the issue is that FOSS communities do have ethical premises you can not play with. I don’t think you can request the anonimous user to pay for a feature to be finished, or base your development on such premises. It would be a complete disaster, developers and collaborators would vanish as soon as you run out of money. Secondly, I don’t think many people realise what are the real costs of hiring somebody to code CG features. It is not something you can put together with just donations. Unless you want to do it in a complete irregular way, which is what we get to see in the Blender community lately. Handlebar’s point is a direct consequence of that behaviour.

But isn’t an example that it is not impossible to create a good free image editor ? I’m not into the whole Gimp discussion but what I have read for years is that Gimps eco world isn’t that really friendly and sometimes even borders to arrogance. I think it would be wrong and dishonest to other good oss projects to state that it has only something to do with a lack of resources. How did the situation evolve that way when there are other examples in the same field… .

Looking at the comments of the blog the attitude doesn’t seem to be changed and for some it has all to do that “we are dumb and we only dislike Gimp because we are used to photoshop”. As long as that attitude doesn’t change, Gimp will always trail behind. The whole arguments it has something to do with the name - which I have read also a numerous times on different occasions - is also bollocks.

I would take photoshop (even an older version like Photoshop 5 for that matter) over Gimp (in it its current state) any day. At my previous job we tried to incorperate The Gimp in our workflow but in the end paying up the license for a Photoshop upgrade was less expensive then using The Gimp with regards of all the time we would loose.

You know I think Krita ( is also looking nice even if it is more a paint/sketch program

Concerning the CMYK I am not really sure if I can say that the Gimp author really knows CMM well.
A CMYK softproof layer is not the answer - color accuracy and preventing of color shifts during
color space transformation is what is important.

well but at least Blender’ s UI is updated. 2.4 gave me nothing else then rejections from industry
people which were working with products which were utilizing workflow and productivity optimized UIs.
I think what is left for Blender 2.5 is cleaning up the last loose ends. But compared to 2.4 the UI
matured dramatically. It is now really a pleasure to use it.

I somewhat can understand what you mean with money contributions.
It is a double sided coin. If somebody needs to work to make money - or can be hired for the job
I think in this case making a donation makes more sense then not ending up with the function.
Think about Blenderfoundation and how during projects they got the funding and pay for all the work.
In particular for long projects / durations I think it is only a fair solution. Otherwise the person would
not even be able to sustain themselfs.

However I noticed already in a last suggestion for a missing simple feature that one of the first
reactions was give me money and I code it. All the tuts people write and publish for free is also
hours they spend. I do it to give something back. So I was a little shocked to see this reaction.

@SilenceBe- at my current job they use photoshop 5.5 still, which means I do, and it also means people see me in a less than ideal state occasionally. I now have Gimp on my workstation. 5.5 blows, and I often wonder how Adobe stayed in business after releasing that crap heap.

An interesting bit of news- looks like the Mypaint team may integrate their brush engine into Krita. Very cool. Maybe Blender will be next, pretty sure Mypaint is a good portion Python. Now that would be awesome.

the brush engine in blender would be a dream !

What never ceases to amaze me is (some) blender users complaining about UI issues of other foss apps like Gimp! It’s beyond me really! :slight_smile:
Blender 2.4x had more UI problems than Gimp by a factor of 10 or 20 -and even that might be an understatement. That’s fixed with 2.5x so why would this possibility be ruled out for Gimp? It might be discontinued if no new developers join the project, it might be forked, it might even be assimilated by other projects. So what? Let’s face it, that’s the fate of many foss apps. What really counts is the community having access to a descent, non-proprietary image manipulation tool. I’ve been using Gimp for several years and I don’t have a problem with it. It’s not the most user-friendly program in the world but one one can get used to it. And yes, in case you’re wondering, I used PS before turning to Gimp so I submit to you that it’s perfectly doable. For the record I should say that I’m a foss purist and activist.

Btw, higher bit depth and CMYK support are the two areas which need urgent attention. No doubt about that and this is why programs like Krita caught my attention.

SeanJM there it is a diference in GIMP development and this projects : Blender3D MyPaint LMMS.

Blender 3d, MyPaint, LMMS main developer are experiment type based programmers , that like to create and make that creation make a step not going back. Where GIMP have a nice blocking developers that have theyr ideeas like a rock in the walll…how can be only 2 developers ? how can Lmms with 2 developers and MyPaint with 2 developers have release dates still more up to date than GIMP ?

If Ton thinked like GIMP developers then Blender3D remained at version 2.32, iet the fact that they search for deleopers and ask them in public to help looks a good change and looks that theyr rocks got little cracks and need fresh thinking to move Gimp from stoneage

Any software it is made for the user to use (thats why it is called “an user” ) and if the user can`t use the software then your software it is Defective By Design or Dead Before Arrival …

The main ideea of Open Source it is to make 1-2-3-7 developers with independent programms use theyr software ,hack them and make a new one all togeter. It is not about money or fame it is about learning and learning and discover and give others to learn.

All Open Source it is about learning , free learning for no need to buy some “proprietary software” only to make a little thing in one University and pay to much money for only a small project for the final exam , and the second part it is that you can use and improve the Open Source after you got that exam where the “proprietary” gets a new version where your project dont even run.

Blender3D it is the real example of what Open Source means.

blendercomp Some software got never forked and ended dead.


what surprises me is that you think it is not ok to question GIMPS interface only because Blender 2.4’s wasnt much better.
I do not really read anywhere users stating that the 2.4x was a milestone in usability - it was rather the opposite
people having to add value to Blender by explaining that it loos strange has flaws but once you got to it that you can actually
work quite fast in it (which focuses on key stroke uses the most).

I wish the GIMP improved. I’ve been waiting for it to improve.
I agree with others on here. We desperately need something new. As it stands now, I bounce back and forth between MyPaint and GIMP.
I wish I could avoid the GIMP altogether. I wish PS worked in wine or on linux. I would actually spend the money.
I’ll donate to MyPaint if they keep up the good work they’re doing.

What are the other linux alternatives that you guys now of?