Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On 2/1/11, Christopher Curtis wrote: > I would agree that there are problems with the way people tend to > interact on this list. One of which is the knee-jerk reaction > whenever an email comes across with the word Photoshop in it. What you call "knee-jerk reaction" is the result of generations of users coming and telling the team to just make GIMP like Photoshop or make it easy to make it behave like Photoshop (which is the same thing really). Would you like to lead this project for the next dozen of years to get an idea? :) Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:39 AM, gespert...@gmail.com wrote: > A couple of days ago a voluntary coder (with an impressive CV) arrived > to this list offering his help and he only got a couple of replies. > This pointless discussion got a lot more of attention. This discussion is almost entirely thin air and bikeshedding, I spent a couple of days formulating one of the texts linked to in one of those replies. (http://gegl.org/contribute.html) People serious about contributing would perhaps have to spend quite a bit of time thinking, investigating and digesting before being able to follow up. I am glad that discussion tapered out; and maybe have responses in the terms of actual code. /Øyvind Kolås -- «The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed» -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/ http://ffii.org/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > On 2/1/11, Christopher Curtis wrote: > >> interact on this list. One of which is the knee-jerk reaction >> whenever an email comes across with the word Photoshop in it. > > What you call "knee-jerk reaction" is the result of generations of > users coming and telling the team to just make GIMP like Photoshop or I recognize the root of the issue, but that makes it no less an issue. What may seem to you like bikeshedding seems to me like the immortal remnants of the Carol Spears hydra. I asked if anyone would complain about a patch that brings GIMP in line with every other program that I could find wrt using Backspace as color fill. One person objected, nobody said it would be a fine patch -- they'd rather complain about Photoshop users. Chris ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:30:05 -0500 Christopher Curtis wrote: > I asked if anyone would complain about a patch that brings GIMP in > line with every other program that I could find wrt using Backspace as > color fill. One person objected, nobody said it would be a fine patch > -- they'd rather complain about Photoshop users. So to answer your question (albeit in a statistically insignificant way), no-one wants the patch. The problem is that you have a definition of what constitutes the peer-group of an application that no-one else seems to agree with. But since your argument is predicated on your definition, you're not going to make any headway. And I'm inclined to agree that the peer-group of an application is those applications likely to be found in the same environment. The proportion of use-time spend adjusting to a new application will (in most cases I hope) be a fraction of the total use-time of that application. So why configure an application in order to improve that small period? I'm not sure that many people use both PS and gimp. The scale of the applications and UIs means that most people will be using one or the other. However, it's likely that users of gimp will also be users of gedit (substitute any other OSS app here). gimp's immediate peer-group would be those non-overlapping but related applications (blender, inkscape), followed by other unrelated applications likely to be found in the same working environment. It's not going to be other applications that fulfill more or less the same niche. My 2c (as a regular and long-term reader of this group, but a non-contributing one). Jon ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
Alexandre Prokoudine gmail.com> writes: > > On 2/1/11, Christopher Curtis wrote: > > > I would agree that there are problems with the way people tend to > > interact on this list. One of which is the knee-jerk reaction > > whenever an email comes across with the word Photoshop in it. > > What you call "knee-jerk reaction" is the result of generations of > users coming and telling the team to just make GIMP like Photoshop or > make it easy to make it behave like Photoshop (which is the same thing > really). Would you like to lead this project for the next dozen of > years to get an idea? :) > > Alexandre Prokoudine > http://libregraphicsworld.org > How about this as a suggestion: Find an existing menuRc files with photoshop key bindings. Ask the author if it can be included in a Gimp release. Include it as a renamed file so its not loaded by default. find a maintainer for it (the original author if possible, but if not, I can do it). Add a single "For Photoshop users" page to the help file. There, tell users how to change the menurc file so they have photoshop-like keys. This won't change the application in any way, and will enable those who insist on it to have photoshop key bindings. I can't see any downside and it's very easy to implement. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Michael Grosberg wrote: > Add a single "For Photoshop users" page to the help file. There, tell users > how > to change the menurc file so they have photoshop-like keys. This won't change > the application in any way, and will enable those who insist on it to have > photoshop key bindings. I can't see any downside and it's very easy to > implement. I see no reason why this mod should be maintained in the GIMP tree. It's an optional mod and as such, along with other PS specific customizations should belong in a separate project, just like GPS presets(that are valuable even on vanilla gimp, instead of the patched one) and FX foundry. -- --Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Michael Grosberg wrote: > How about this as a suggestion: > Find an existing menuRc files with photoshop key bindings. Ask the author if > it > can be included in a Gimp release. Include it as a renamed file so its not > loaded by default. find a maintainer for it (the original author if possible, > but if not, I can do it). *sigh* http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/tree/etc/ps-menurc Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
As it was stated before, making applications act "similar" doesn't turn out in "familiarity", but in a percepction of incompleteness. The most our applications looks like others, the most former users of other applications will spot what's missing, perceiving differences as limitations. When I switched from GIMP after almost 15 years of Photoshop the first reaction was the same. I wanted GIMP to behave like photoshop, because I considered Photoshop's the right way of doing things. Now I'm glad it didn't work that way, because it forced me to understand that I was using a different program. In the future I'd love to see even more differences. Who knows, maybe a node UI instead of layers, for instance ;-) Moving in that direction, imho, would stop this endless and pointless flamewar about GIMP vs. Photoshop, and people who moves to GIMP would be doing an informed choice instead of seeking a free-of-charge Photoshop. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Christopher Curtis wrote: >> What you call "knee-jerk reaction" is the result of generations of >> users coming and telling the team to just make GIMP like Photoshop or > > I recognize the root of the issue, but that makes it no less an issue. > What may seem to you like bikeshedding seems to me like the immortal > remnants of the Carol Spears hydra. > > I asked if anyone would complain about a patch that brings GIMP in > line with every other program that I could find wrt using Backspace as > color fill. One person objected, nobody said it would be a fine patch > -- they'd rather complain about Photoshop users. Because people talk about the big picture. Pretty please carefully reread what Jon Cruz wrote in the thread. It's a spot-on message. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > Because people talk about the big picture. Pretty please carefully > reread what Jon Cruz wrote in the thread. It's a spot-on message. You mean Jon Senior? js -><- > > Alexandre Prokoudine > http://libregraphicsworld.org > ___ > Gimp-developer mailing list > Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer > ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote: > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > >> Because people talk about the big picture. Pretty please carefully >> reread what Jon Cruz wrote in the thread. It's a spot-on message. > > You mean Jon Senior? Nope. I did mean Jon Cruz :) http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/lists/gimp-developer/2011-January/026174.html --- snip --- This came up at linux.conf.au this week. I had a chance to talk with a couple of users and graphic designers about UI, including the issue of being made similar to Adobe products. The almost immediate response was that if the program is not going to behave *exactly* as the Adobe one does, in smallest detail, then it is far better to have an explicitly distinct UI. Being "close" just leaves the end user with a vague feeling of incompleteness and that the software is not really ready for serious use. --- snip --- Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
Alexandre Prokoudine gmail.com> writes: > *sigh* > > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/tree/etc/ps-menurc > > Alexandre Prokoudine > http://libregraphicsworld.org > I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, undiscoverable features. Now only a help page is needed. I think I'll go and join the Gimp-Docs mailing list and take it from there. This is an area in which I have a lot of experience (I've been documenting graphic apps for several years now). ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011 19:01:12 +0300 Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > > > >> Because people talk about the big picture. Pretty please carefully > >> reread what Jon Cruz wrote in the thread. It's a spot-on message. > > > > You mean Jon Senior? > > Nope. I did mean Jon Cruz :) But thank you Joao for categorizing what I had to say "spot-on". :-) Jon ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Michael Grosberg wrote: > I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, undiscoverable > features. > Now only a help page is needed. I think I'll go and join the Gimp-Docs > mailing list and take it from there. This is an area in which I have a lot > of experience (I've been documenting graphic apps for several years now). So far it looks like the best outcome of the thread :) Thank you. Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On 02/01/2011 06:25 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Michael Grosberg wrote: > >> I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, undiscoverable >> features. >> Now only a help page is needed. I think I'll go and join the Gimp-Docs >> mailing list and take it from there. This is an area in which I have a lot >> of experience (I've been documenting graphic apps for several years now). > So far it looks like the best outcome of the thread :) Thank you. Let's remove one stroke from the name of the program. Let's call it GINP. GINP Is Not Photoshop. ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
> On 02/01/2011 06:25 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Michael Grosberg wrote: > > > >> I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, > >> undiscoverable features. > >> Now only a help page is needed. I think I'll go and join the > >> Gimp-Docs mailing list and take it from there. This is an area in > >> which I have a lot of experience (I've been documenting graphic > >> apps for several years now). > > So far it looks like the best outcome of the thread :) Thank you. > Let's remove one stroke from the name of the program. > > Let's call it GINP. > > GINP Is Not Photoshop. Nobody says it is or it ought to be. Best regards! thebodzio signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 17:16 +, Michael Grosberg wrote: > Alexandre Prokoudine gmail.com> writes: > > > *sigh* > > > > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/tree/etc/ps-menurc > > > > Alexandre Prokoudine > > http://libregraphicsworld.org > > > > I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, undiscoverable > features. This is documented in the user manual even: http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-introduction-history-2-0.html I am sure the gimp-docs team will appreciate a patch that moves this information to a better place though. It's somewhat difficult to locate it in the list of changes for GIMP 2.0. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
> As it was stated before, making applications act "similar" doesn't > turn out in "familiarity", but in a percepction of incompleteness. The > most our applications looks like others, the most former users of > other applications will spot what's missing, perceiving differences as > limitations. > When I switched from GIMP after almost 15 years of Photoshop the first > reaction was the same. I wanted GIMP to behave like photoshop, because > I considered Photoshop's the right way of doing things. > Now I'm glad it didn't work that way, because it forced me to > understand that I was using a different program. My experience in that matter is that my workflow is _unchanged_ wheather I use GIMP or Ps. I use curves in the same places, quick mask and mask in general too, brush, stamp, healing… the list goes on. I love the idea of “display filters” that I use when working on bitmaps with GIMP but I fail to see more such grounbreaking features like that. The paradigm of raster graphics editing stays pretty much the same. I think that most of the work towards the shortcut scheme switcher is already done. What is missing it seems to be the final step—small but completing the whole thing as “being convenient”. I like to think about this list as a place of meeting both developers and users. I'm a graphic designer with not enough time to do crucial coding, but enough time to try to improve GIMP with a simple suggestion: shortcut “theme” switcher and within it Ps “compatible” shortcuts as an option, how about that? I don't think it's much in the sense of coding, but it is much if you're trying to convince somebody to use GIMP. Why? Maybe in time the'll contribute their own ideas as well—as long as they'd be willing to use GIMP in their everyday work. I think that similar shortcuts will help to promote GIMP to them. I _DO_ appreciate the developers work, admire it in fact because it's selfless, but still I think both devs and designers should work together. I'm telling what I'd like to have, trying to reason it the best I can. If I fail to convince the others to my ideas then, well… no problem at all :)—that's the right of democracy, which I respect. > In the future I'd love to see even more differences. > Who knows, maybe a node UI instead of layers, for instance ;-) > Moving in that direction, imho, would stop this endless and pointless > flamewar about GIMP vs. Photoshop, and people who moves to GIMP would > be doing an informed choice instead of seeking a free-of-charge > Photoshop. I'd love to have them too! But _real_ differences, not the ones made only for differing's sake :). Node editing could be promising. Especially if used nodes could be grouped as larger blocks for further use. That would work somewhat like “recoded actions” but much more powerful. But that's the subject for yet another thread… ;). Best regards! thebodzio PS. Sorry if somebody felt my unleashing all this a bit trolly ;) but one have to try to improve what one likes, even if the process is about to be painful. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
> On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 17:16 +, Michael Grosberg wrote: > > Alexandre Prokoudine gmail.com> writes: > > > > > *sigh* > > > > > > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gimp/tree/etc/ps-menurc > > > > > > Alexandre Prokoudine > > > http://libregraphicsworld.org > > > > > > > I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, > > undiscoverable features. > > This is documented in the user manual even: > http://docs.gimp.org/en/gimp-introduction-history-2-0.html > > I am sure the gimp-docs team will appreciate a patch that moves this > information to a better place though. It's somewhat difficult to > locate it in the list of changes for GIMP 2.0. I'd welcomed this as an improvement. Not exactly as convenient as I hoped but still. Best regards! thebodzio signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Michael Grosberg > wrote: > > Add a single "For Photoshop users" page to the help file. There, > > tell users how to change the menurc file so they have > > photoshop-like keys. This won't change the application in any way, > > and will enable those who insist on it to have photoshop key > > bindings. I can't see any downside and it's very easy to implement. > > I see no reason why this mod should be maintained in the GIMP tree. > It's an optional mod and as such, along with other PS specific > customizations should belong in a separate project, just like GPS > presets(that are valuable even on vanilla gimp, instead of the patched > one) and FX foundry. The reason is: most graphic developers I know don't like to mingle more than what can be mingled with their app GUI. Almost everytime suggestion to change some file manually is welcomed with an unpleasant grimace ;) and rather nasty feeling about proposed tool. I'd love to avoid that with GIMP while trying to promote it. That's why I suggested the whole shortcut scheme/theme thing. I did it even more so because in fact GIMP is halfway there with configurable shortcuts. What I'd love to have is being able to change all of them with one switch. In my GIMP 2.7.1 there are options to save shortcuts, restore fatory defaults and clear them. I'd like to be able to change them not only to Ps-like but also to ones custom defined suitable for cleaning some scans while preparing reedition of a book or while retouching some photos. I don't like to do that by exchanging config file every time I need to make a general change or by hunting down proper actions in menus or shortcut editor. That's all :). Maybe all this conversation would turn other way if I didn't use the dreaded Ps banner ;). Best regards! thebodzio signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
> And all this conversation is because you think CTRL+Backspace makes > more sense than CTRL+. (because you're used to that combination) and > you don't want to take 30 seconds of your time to personalize the > accelerators? > Seriously? If think so then I'm afraid that you didn't read my posts carefully or misinterpreted them. Yes, I'm used to some combinations and I fail to see the reason why should I change my customs. I doubt the new ones would improve my speed or any other quality. I sure can replace default shortcut set with the other quite easily but not everyone would if it had to be done by seeking the right file and placing another in its stead. My poll is tiny (2 persons beside myself) but at least it is real. So 3 graphic developers says: we'd like to have it, how about you? That's all. Not we demand, we require, but we'd like to. I've stated the reasoning behind my suggestion a couple of times and right now I can't think of other arguments “for”. > GIMP accelerators are customizable using a visible option from the > Edit menu, and you can even choose to assign accelerators dinamically > from the preferences. > The menurc file in the prefs folder has the list of accelerators. You > could create a custom version with the combinations you want (or > google for it, just to find that someone already did it). That's true, but also it is _not_ the point of the whole conversation to state it. > A couple of days ago a voluntary coder (with an impressive CV) arrived > to this list offering his help and he only got a couple of replies. My proposition, if applauded, could give him one thing to help at. But even if not, I feel that threads that state the problem and propose a way of solving it are great sources of tasks for anybody who's willing to do some work. Surely one would see that if only considered things calmly. > This pointless discussion got a lot more of attention. Pointless it is if it doesn't bring any changes but that can be said only after it's over. Right now I can see that there's at least a will to at least make things clearer about the subject in documentation. Best regards! thebodzio signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
On Wednesday, February 02, 2011 01:28:04 Bogdan Szczurek wrote: > > This pointless discussion got a lot more of attention. > > Pointless it is if it doesn't bring any changes but that can be said > only after it's over. Right now I can see that there's at least a will > to at least make things clearer about the subject in documentation. Well, on developer side there seems to be a consensus forming that this ps- menurc file should and will be removed from git and I personally agree. such enhancements should be maintained outside gimp. So most likely, once this is over you are furher away from what you came here for than before. If you are interested in such enhacncements, you may want to offer&maintain a tool that creates for the user that runs it a PS-ified profile. it would be relatively easy to make. -- Alexia ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop “compatibility” mode
> On Jan 30, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Liam R E Quin wrote: > > > On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 01:43 +0100, Bogdan Szczurek wrote: > > > >> The thing is, that we concluded that permamenet transition or even > >> occasional use of Gimp would be much more appealing for Ps-bred > >> guys (like me ;)) if one would have possibility to use the same > >> (or at least much similar) keyboard shortcuts. > > > > There's some danger here -- as people in Germany found when they > > compared moving to KDE or Gnome from Windows: when the new system > > is too similar to the old, people start going into automatic mode, > > and trip up much more over the differences. > > > This came up at linux.conf.au this week. I had a chance to talk with > a couple of users and graphic designers about UI, including the issue > of being made similar to Adobe products. The almost immediate > response was that if the program is not going to behave *exactly* as > the Adobe one does, in smallest detail, then it is far better to have > an explicitly distinct UI. Yes, _if_ the program _is_not_going_to_behave_exactly. But there's much convergence here. Most paradigms and ideas are the same. I dare to say in many cases shortcut is what differs most. Anyway, I didn't suggest to change _default_ shortcuts but to enable one to choose between a couple sets of them _by_ default. I'd like to see some _real_ innovation in GIMP (like “display filters” or quite novel GUI) but by this thread I'm trying to refer to here and now. Since I'm a graphic designer I'm trying to pull things towards my side to have the tool I'd really like to use. Forgive the blasphemy, but maybe it would be nice to try to build new tool from the scratch instead of evolving the old one (please don't tell me that I can “fork off” ;)—I really don't mean to offend anybody, most honestly). Thinking about the problem from “point zero” could help to throw away old habits and ways of thinking. I remeber one time some attempt to revolutionize GIMP's GUI but the changes, if brought, haven't been of such great magnitude as I expected. > Being "close" just leaves the end user with a vague feeling of > incompleteness and that the software is not really ready for serious > use. I agree, but also I think that similar shortcuts would help to lessen such feeling. Best regards! thebodzio signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop ?compatibility? mode
ROFL On 02/01/2011 03:54 PM, Ofnuts wrote: > On 02/01/2011 06:25 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Michael Grosberg wrote: >> >>> I will refrain from expressing my opinion on undocumented, undiscoverable >>> features. >>> Now only a help page is needed. I think I'll go and join the Gimp-Docs >>> mailing list and take it from there. This is an area in which I have a lot >>> of experience (I've been documenting graphic apps for several years now). >> So far it looks like the best outcome of the thread :) Thank you. > Let's remove one stroke from the name of the program. > > Let's call it GINP. > > GINP Is Not Photoshop. > > ___ > Gimp-developer mailing list > Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer > ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Photoshop “compatibility” mode
> Furthermore, collaborating with Inkscape *instead* makes a lot of > sense, because GIMP + Inkscape are a usual combo. Blindly reusing > shortcuts from old Adobe products doesn't make a lot of sense. Blindly—yes. But proposition is not to do it that way. My reason is: I want to promote GIMP to e.g. my collegues who are used to using Ps. Most of their work is doing some corrections and while doing so they rarely use anything else than the pointer and keyboard shortcuts. If they want to try new app they'd like to hit the usual key to get to usual tool. Not getting it leaves them simply frustrated. I hope to lessen the frustration by offering them shortcuts they know. I can do that by telling them to seek some file and change it with the one I've provided or by asking project leaders and comunity what do they think about having “shortcut switch” and option to use Ps-accels by default. Then I'd be able to tell my friends: “Just go to preferences and choose Ps shortcuts”. This solution appears harder to get but easier to use when provided. > I'd > have to look at Ps again to make sure nothing changed, but Illustrator > carries around somewhat inconsistent shortcuts exactly because old > habits die hard. I'd say that the idea of reusing shortcuts from an > application where they had been stacked on top of each other over > years without review is a bit on the crazy side. > > The very same "many people" who don't care about GNOME want GIMP to be > a drop-in Photoshop replacement. I do honestly care about them both. > Needless to say, this is not the > point why GIMP exists and is being worked on. One would have to lose > all self-respect and joy of life to work on a free drop-in replacement > for *any* software project. Yet GIMP is often compared to Ps and I think not only due to the fact that both are raster graphic editors. I think that now they share too many ideas about graphics editing to avoid being compared any other way than tool for tool. There are voices in this conversation about having GIMP a quite different tool than any other, but I'm afraid it's not so different after all. Please don't be mad at me for saying that for I don't intend to offend anybody. I just see it that way. If somebody would be willing to kindly prove me wrong, I'd be happy to talk it over on another thread :) (it could be beneficial to enumerating GIMP distinct features and workflow ideas e.g. as a part of wiki). Best regards! thebodzio signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
