Re: [Gimp-user] Re: drawing a simple rectangle ; drawing an arrow (newbie)

2005-07-09 Thread delriaan

wouldn't GFig? work for making rectangles easily?

- D3l'ri@@|\|


___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


Re: [Gimp-user] when even free advertising fails

2005-05-09 Thread delriaan
It seems that some Photoshop users have this notion that GIMP was meant to  
be the David to Adobe's Goliath.  Maybe it's just me, but I see GIMP as  
developing into its own application rather than being a mere Photoshop  
clone.  I think that unfortunately, some people who slam GIMP are of the  
hand it to me on a silver platter mentality rather than simply not  
knowing how to use GIMP.  Some don't want to tackle any kind of  
significant learning curve ... some do but are impatient.  I've used GIMP  
for a long while now, and will stand by it -- especially since it's such a  
well-developed open-source application.  Yes, there is room for  
improvement, and I believe it'll come, but if the basis of the  
GIMP-slammer's rant is that it isn't like Photoshop, it won't matter how  
good GIMP gets.  L8rz!

 - Del'riaan
On Sun, 08 May 2005 08:12:15 -0700, Tom Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:

Kalle Ounapuu wrote:
The bug-tracker serves it's purpose, but you can't expect everyone to  
be reading it over before making any comment about GIMP.
I agree.  People use Gimp (or try to) and have a problem or criticism  
and post their feedback here instead of filing bug/enhancement reports  
or looking to see what is already documented in Bugzilla, etc.

Maybe there are GIMP users who would love everyone to drop Photoshop  
(or whatever) and use GIMP.
You know, I'm not sure this is really the case.  At least not based on  
discussion I've seen on this mailing list.  I think a lot of frustration  
stems from people slamming Gimp for simply not looking, feeling,  
behaving, or tasting exactly like PhotoShop.  It's almost like if it's  
not PhotoShop, it's crap.  The focus tends to be on what PhotoShop does  
that Gimp doesn't do and almost no mention is made of the things Gimp  
can do that PhotoShop can't.

If so, they will have to deal with more of this.
I think constructive criticism on Gimp's UI, usability, features or  
missing features is what is desired much more than the Gimp sucks cuz  
it can't do this obscure thing PhotoShop can kinds of comments.

Not everyone can spend the time to search something out, or in fact  
they don't care, they would rather voice it out right away.
Yep, you're right on the money here.  I think the bulk of the new Gimp  
users don't even think to look at Bugzilla or maybe even the mailing  
list archives before posting their comments since they are frustrated or  
focused on what they are trying to do with Gimp and simply post  
questions or comments to get immediate help.  I know I tend to do the  
same from time to time but I try to search the mailing list archives  
before posting a question to see if it has already been discussed.

Peace...
Tom
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sven
Neumann
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 2:49 PM
To: Gezim Hoxha
Cc: gimp user
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] when even free advertising fails
  Hi,
 Gezim Hoxha [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 07:04 -0700, Carol Spears wrote:

a forum where they can constantly bombard and belittle TheGIMP and are
free to do so and the best they can pull out of their over-extended
reasoning is this layers effect stuff.
I'm not sure who they are, but if you're referring to people in this
list that are not afraid to admit gimp's weaknesses, these people have
every right to point them out. You can't fix a problem if you don't  
even
accept it. Lack of layer effects is not a problem?
  You are perfectly right that it is important to point out weak spots.
The discussions that have been happening on this list lately have
however not pointed out a singleq weak spots that wouldn't have been
well-known already. Bringing up stuff that is already in the
bug-tracker and on the roadmap for years doesn't really help anyone.
  Sven
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user


[Gimp-user] modular GIMP

2005-05-05 Thread delriaan
Just a general question to throw out there:  Is it feasible to have GIMP  
be modular in it's filters and image tools (basically all of the image  
processing stuff outside of painting)?  I've worked in 3D with apps that  
have such an approach, where each module can be added / removed and the  
object(s) update accordingly.  This would make image editing even more  
flexible, professional, and sexy (hehehe).  This way, one doesn't worry as  
much about having to go thru a lot of undos when something goes wrong or  
the artist has a flash of inspiration that's on a totally different track  
than he/she was on before.  I've been using GIMP for quite a while now,  
and I believe such functionality would really enhance the GIMP experience.

I realize doing such a thing would be a significant change in the inner  
workings of the app.  But it's an idea, and that's what's great about the  
open-source world: that ideas are exchanged and acted upon (or discarded)  
without sitting in board rooms talking about demographics and  
cost-effectiveness and all that drab rubbish!  L8rz!
___
Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user