Weird forum and layout

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Weird forum and layout

Roundball
Man, I'm having trouble understanding the layout of this website and forums, as
well as the design philosophy behind GIMP user interface.
For starters, on the home page its hard to tell what the content is when so much
of it looks like advertisements. Then, on the forums, only bits and pieces of
them are shown. I don't see any display of the overall listing of posts and
responses as we get with other forums. Although I found a longer list of just
post topics, most of them were labled as awaiting moderator approval. Not much
help.

Even in making this post, I got confused at the lack of a "post" button.
Instead, there is a captcha box that looks like an ad directly above a real ad
that has
TWO captcha words in it. Which one am I to use? Took me 4 tries to get it right,
not knowing whether they were case sensitive. Then, outside the box, in tiny
letters is a button "create discussion,"

What I am saying is that it is so radically different that I find it very hard
to use. There must be some point behind the design of layout, but I'm not
getting it. Like GIMP itself, I don't understand why the developers would want
to create something so different from what we are familiar with, and have
invested huge amounts of time learning, so that to use GIMP we now have to
relearn everything we  thought we knew. This situation is really giving me
second thoughts about whether I want to go through with this steep re-education
curve unless there is some great benefit here that I fail to understand.

While I appreciate the huge voluntary effort that made in creating a free app,
and it is not my intention to take anything away from that, I just can't
comprehend why it was done the way it was. It seems to me its radical
differences won't do much to attract new users.

--
Boxman (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Pat David
This is not a forum, it's a bridge to a traditional mailing list that can
be found here:

https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list

Or you can use the archives to see threaded conversations:

https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

This website is _not_ run by the official GIMP team - that can be found at
https://wwe.gimp.org.

I suggest you have a look at the official website and check out the user
documentation (help) and tutorials there.
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:01 AM Boxman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Man, I'm having trouble understanding the layout of this website and
> forums, as
> well as the design philosophy behind GIMP user interface.
> For starters, on the home page its hard to tell what the content is when
> so much
> of it looks like advertisements. Then, on the forums, only bits and pieces
> of
> them are shown. I don't see any display of the overall listing of posts and
> responses as we get with other forums. Although I found a longer list of
> just
> post topics, most of them were labled as awaiting moderator approval. Not
> much
> help.
>
> Even in making this post, I got confused at the lack of a "post" button.
> Instead, there is a captcha box that looks like an ad directly above a
> real ad
> that has
> TWO captcha words in it. Which one am I to use? Took me 4 tries to get it
> right,
> not knowing whether they were case sensitive. Then, outside the box, in
> tiny
> letters is a button "create discussion,"
>
> What I am saying is that it is so radically different that I find it very
> hard
> to use. There must be some point behind the design of layout, but I'm not
> getting it. Like GIMP itself, I don't understand why the developers would
> want
> to create something so different from what we are familiar with, and have
> invested huge amounts of time learning, so that to use GIMP we now have to
> relearn everything we  thought we knew. This situation is really giving me
> second thoughts about whether I want to go through with this steep
> re-education
> curve unless there is some great benefit here that I fail to understand.
>
> While I appreciate the huge voluntary effort that made in creating a free
> app,
> and it is not my intention to take anything away from that, I just can't
> comprehend why it was done the way it was. It seems to me its radical
> differences won't do much to attract new users.
>
> --
> Boxman (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-user-list mailing list
> List address:    [hidden email]
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
>
--
Pat David
GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Pat David
Typo in the URL: https://www.gimp.org
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:05 AM Pat David <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This is not a forum, it's a bridge to a traditional mailing list that can
> be found here:
>
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
>
> Or you can use the archives to see threaded conversations:
>
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
>
> This website is _not_ run by the official GIMP team - that can be found at
> https://wwe.gimp.org.
>
> I suggest you have a look at the official website and check out the user
> documentation (help) and tutorials there.
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:01 AM Boxman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Man, I'm having trouble understanding the layout of this website and
> forums, as
> well as the design philosophy behind GIMP user interface.
> For starters, on the home page its hard to tell what the content is when
> so much
> of it looks like advertisements. Then, on the forums, only bits and pieces
> of
> them are shown. I don't see any display of the overall listing of posts and
> responses as we get with other forums. Although I found a longer list of
> just
> post topics, most of them were labled as awaiting moderator approval. Not
> much
> help.
>
> Even in making this post, I got confused at the lack of a "post" button.
> Instead, there is a captcha box that looks like an ad directly above a
> real ad
> that has
> TWO captcha words in it. Which one am I to use? Took me 4 tries to get it
> right,
> not knowing whether they were case sensitive. Then, outside the box, in
> tiny
> letters is a button "create discussion,"
>
> What I am saying is that it is so radically different that I find it very
> hard
> to use. There must be some point behind the design of layout, but I'm not
> getting it. Like GIMP itself, I don't understand why the developers would
> want
> to create something so different from what we are familiar with, and have
> invested huge amounts of time learning, so that to use GIMP we now have to
> relearn everything we  thought we knew. This situation is really giving me
> second thoughts about whether I want to go through with this steep
> re-education
> curve unless there is some great benefit here that I fail to understand.
>
> While I appreciate the huge voluntary effort that made in creating a free
> app,
> and it is not my intention to take anything away from that, I just can't
> comprehend why it was done the way it was. It seems to me its radical
> differences won't do much to attract new users.
>
> --
> Boxman (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-user-list mailing list
> List address:    [hidden email]
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
>
> --
> Pat David
> GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC
>
--
Pat David
GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Simon Budig
In reply to this post by Roundball
Boxman ([hidden email]) wrote:
> For starters, on the home page its hard to tell what the content is when so much
> of it looks like advertisements. Then, on the forums, only bits and pieces of
> them are shown.

gimpusers.com is not an official gimp forum. In fact on our official web
site there is no forum.

> This situation is really giving me
> second thoughts about whether I want to go through with this steep
> re-education curve unless there is some great benefit here that I fail
> to understand.

Please feel free to stick to your previous solution. If using GIMP is
too much effort for you, then don't. It really is that simple.

Gimp has a long and convoluted history, and it most certainly is not
designed to be a clone of some other tool - since that would be quite
boring for us developers. I consider it good to have different
approachas to the same problem.

And no, that does not mean that we don't want you as a new user - but we
certainly won't force you into unhappiness.

Bye,
        Simon

--
              [hidden email]              http://simon.budig.de/
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Elle Stone
In reply to this post by Pat David
On 02/11/2017 09:05 AM, Pat David wrote:
> This is not a forum, it's a bridge to a traditional mailing list that can
> be found here:
>
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
>
> Or you can use the archives to see threaded conversations:
>
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Pat, do you know who actually owns/runs gimpusers.com? There doesn't
seem to be an "about" link anywhere (or else I missed it). Same question
and comment applies to gimpchat.com - I don't see an "about" link.

It would be nice if these (and similar) sites would supply a little
clarifying information including a statement about their official or
unofficial relationship with GIMP.

Best,
Elle
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Elle Stone
In reply to this post by Roundball
On 02/11/2017 08:58 AM, Boxman wrote:
> Like GIMP itself, I don't understand why the developers would want
> to create something so different from what we are familiar with, and have
> invested huge amounts of time learning, so that to use GIMP we now have to
> relearn everything we  thought we knew.

I used PhotoShop for several years. When I switched to Linux and started
using GIMP, to me the GIMP UI seemed "just like PhotoShop".

I've heard people say that the Krita UI seems "just like PhotoShop".
Personally I disagree - I do use Krita as well as GIMP, but it was a
long rocky road to get used to the Krita interface.

I know a few other people who think the Krita UI is very different from
the PhotoShop UI. These same people think the GIMP UI is very similar to
the PhotoShop UI.

Does anyone have any possible explanations for why different people with
a background using PhotoShop have such wildly diverse reactions to the
GIMP and Krita User Interfaces?

I'm wondering if people's reactions are linked to GIMP's default
Multi-Window Mode vs Krita's default Single-Window Mode.

I always had PhotoShop configured with the main window as small as
possible, and with a lot of free-floating dockers. So to me GIMP's
default Multi-Window Mode is very comfortable to use (and I don't like
Single Window Mode at all).

Elle



_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Pat David
In reply to this post by Elle Stone
Elle,

Pat, do you know who actually owns/runs gimpusers.com? There doesn't
seem to be an "about" link anywhere (or else I missed it). Same question
and comment applies to gimpchat.com - I don't see an "about" link.


I don't know who runs gimpusers.com, and gmipchat.com recently changed
owners.


It would be nice if these (and similar) sites would supply a little
clarifying information including a statement about their official or
unofficial relationship with GIMP.


 I agree 100%.  This has been a point of contention in various ways for a
while now but I'm not sure what the best solution would be.

I have some ideas, but I'll need some time a little later to collect them
into something more cohesive...

pat
--
Pat David
GPG: 66D1 7CA6 8088 4874 946D  18BD 67C7 6219 89E9 57AC
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Ofnuts-2
In reply to this post by Roundball
On 11/02/17 14:58, Boxman wrote:

> Man, I'm having trouble understanding the layout of this website and forums, as
> well as the design philosophy behind GIMP user interface.
> For starters, on the home page its hard to tell what the content is when so much
> of it looks like advertisements. Then, on the forums, only bits and pieces of
> them are shown. I don't see any display of the overall listing of posts and
> responses as we get with other forums. Although I found a longer list of just
> post topics, most of them were labled as awaiting moderator approval. Not much
> help.
>
> Even in making this post, I got confused at the lack of a "post" button.
> Instead, there is a captcha box that looks like an ad directly above a real ad
> that has
> TWO captcha words in it. Which one am I to use? Took me 4 tries to get it right,
> not knowing whether they were case sensitive. Then, outside the box, in tiny
> letters is a button "create discussion,"
>
> What I am saying is that it is so radically different that I find it very hard
> to use. There must be some point behind the design of layout, but I'm not
> getting it. Like GIMP itself, I don't understand why the developers would want
> to create something so different from what we are familiar with, and have
> invested huge amounts of time learning, so that to use GIMP we now have to
> relearn everything we  thought we knew. This situation is really giving me
> second thoughts about whether I want to go through with this steep re-education
> curve unless there is some great benefit here that I fail to understand.
>
> While I appreciate the huge voluntary effort that made in creating a free app,
> and it is not my intention to take anything away from that, I just can't
> comprehend why it was done the way it was. It seems to me its radical
> differences won't do much to attract new users.
>

Shameless plug: if you are looking for a more "traditional" Gimp-related
forum, try: http://gimp-forum.net

_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Joel Rees
In reply to this post by Elle Stone
On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Elle Stone
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> [...]
> Does anyone have any possible explanations for why different people with a
> background using PhotoShop have such wildly diverse reactions to the GIMP
> and Krita User Interfaces?

version of Photoshop? OS platform?

in addition to user preferences, as you mention.

> I'm wondering if people's reactions are linked to GIMP's default
> Multi-Window Mode vs Krita's default Single-Window Mode.

in some cases, probably.

> I always had PhotoShop configured with the main window as small as possible,
> and with a lot of free-floating dockers. So to me GIMP's default
> Multi-Window Mode is very comfortable to use (and I don't like Single Window
> Mode at all).

Users have a tendency to think the subsection of the UI that they use
most is the app.

--
Joel Rees

I'm imagining I'm a novelist:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Rick Strong-2
They're ALL weird, even Photoshop's latest incarnation.

But at least GIMP has a very helpful list of knowledgeable users that we can
easily access. No extra charge.

Rick S.

-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Rees
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 1:02 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] Weird forum and layout

On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Elle Stone
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> [...]
> Does anyone have any possible explanations for why different people with a
> background using PhotoShop have such wildly diverse reactions to the GIMP
> and Krita User Interfaces?

version of Photoshop? OS platform?

in addition to user preferences, as you mention.

> I'm wondering if people's reactions are linked to GIMP's default
> Multi-Window Mode vs Krita's default Single-Window Mode.

in some cases, probably.

> I always had PhotoShop configured with the main window as small as
> possible,
> and with a lot of free-floating dockers. So to me GIMP's default
> Multi-Window Mode is very comfortable to use (and I don't like Single
> Window
> Mode at all).

Users have a tendency to think the subsection of the UI that they use
most is the app.

--
Joel Rees

I'm imagining I'm a novelist:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list 

_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Elle Stone
In reply to this post by Joel Rees
On 02/12/2017 01:02 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Elle Stone
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> [...]
>> Does anyone have any possible explanations for why different people with a
>> background using PhotoShop have such wildly diverse reactions to the GIMP
>> and Krita User Interfaces?
>
> version of Photoshop? OS platform?

Good point -whether a user thinks Krita or GIMP is "more like PhotoShop"
might depend on which version of Photoshop they've used. I'm only
familiar with one version of PhotoShop, and that's CS2 on Windows. Maybe
PhotoShop on Mac has a substantially different UI, and maybe CC looks
substantially different than CS2.

>
> in addition to user preferences, as you mention.
>
>> I'm wondering if people's reactions are linked to GIMP's default
>> Multi-Window Mode vs Krita's default Single-Window Mode.
>
> in some cases, probably.
>
>> I always had PhotoShop configured with the main window as small as possible,
>> and with a lot of free-floating dockers. So to me GIMP's default
>> Multi-Window Mode is very comfortable to use (and I don't like Single Window
>> Mode at all).
>
> Users have a tendency to think the subsection of the UI that they use
> most is the app.
>

Another good point. On Photoshop I only ever edited photographs, mostly
starting from a raw file, and never tried to paint using PhotoShop.
Maybe Krita's paint tools resemble PhotoShop's paint tools.

Elle

_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Weird forum and layout

Roundball
>Good point -whether a user thinks Krita or GIMP is "more like
>PhotoShop"
>might depend on which version of Photoshop they've used. I'm only
>familiar with one version of PhotoShop, and that's CS2 on Windows.
>Maybe
>PhotoShop on Mac has a substantially different UI, and maybe CC looks
>substantially different than CS2.
>Another good point. On Photoshop I only ever edited photographs,
>mostly
>starting from a raw file, and never tried to paint using PhotoShop.
>Maybe Krita's paint tools resemble PhotoShop's paint tools.
>
>Elle

Shortly after I posted last week, I had a medical crisis and ended up in
hospital, so that's the reason I haven't responded to any of these posts over
the last week. As I said, I'm not looking to be unduely critical OF gimp, just
looking for some answers. And no, I'm not saying that I think GIMP should be
more like P'shop. No, I merely expected a similarity of tools that worked in
more or less the same ways. That, I don't think, is unreasonable. Its like as if
you went to the hardware store to buy a hammer but all they had were hammers
with curved handles and thus you had to relearn hammering nails anew. Not
something one would want to be forced to do. The lack of a general purpose
cursor, to my way of thinking, is just that basic and it really threw me for a
loop.

WHY do new users expect expect similarity with P'shop? My guess is that more
users than not are casual users who use it far less than professionals. Indeed,
that is the major attraction of free software; we don't want to pay $600 + for
something used only infrequently and thus we are frustrated to find such a steep
learning curve since money doesn't constitute the only form of investment -
there's the matter of invested time.

I was hoping that there was some sort of basic design philosophy that I was
missing that would, upon learning of it, would ease the transition. Apparently
not. GIMP is merely different not by any conceptual means. I don't see any
reasons for the differences but the reality is that I just have to be patience
and take the time to relearn.

--
Boxman (via www.gimpusers.com/forums)
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Mark Morin-2
You say that you are not trying to unduly critical of gimp. By that I
take it to mean that you are trying to be duly critical of gimp. That is
the way that you are coming across.  Have you considered the possibility
that the answers to your questions is: because that's the way it is.
Gimp is not photoshop. Any expectation for it to look like or act like
photoshop is unrealistic. The internet is not a hardware store where all
that is available is one product. If you don't like what you see move on
to something else.

If the casual user picks up gimp because he or she doesn't want to shell
out hundreds of dollars for a program that she or he may use once in a
blue moon, it is safe to assume that the person in question is not an
experienced photoshop user. Therefore, there would be no unlearning
curve as the person got used to using gimp after having become
proficient in photoshop. If that person is proficient in photoshop such
that they need to unlearn things to use gimp then they probably are not
a casual user of photoshop. Thus, new users to gimp (in your words
"casual users"), who are using it for the reason you give, probably
don't expect it to perform like photoshop. They simply expect it to
perform as it performs because that's all they know.

Photoshop is not the gold standard by which all other programs are to be
evaluated. One could just as legitimately ask why photoshop's UI is not
like gimp's and what the underlying rationale is for their UI. Gimp is
not nor ever was and never will be a "free version of photoshop."

I hope that you are feeling better.


On 2/17/2017 2:56 PM, Boxman wrote:

>> Good point -whether a user thinks Krita or GIMP is "more like
>> PhotoShop"
>> might depend on which version of Photoshop they've used. I'm only
>> familiar with one version of PhotoShop, and that's CS2 on Windows.
>> Maybe
>> PhotoShop on Mac has a substantially different UI, and maybe CC looks
>> substantially different than CS2.
>> Another good point. On Photoshop I only ever edited photographs,
>> mostly
>> starting from a raw file, and never tried to paint using PhotoShop.
>> Maybe Krita's paint tools resemble PhotoShop's paint tools.
>>
>> Elle
> Shortly after I posted last week, I had a medical crisis and ended up in
> hospital, so that's the reason I haven't responded to any of these posts over
> the last week. As I said, I'm not looking to be unduely critical OF gimp, just
> looking for some answers. And no, I'm not saying that I think GIMP should be
> more like P'shop. No, I merely expected a similarity of tools that worked in
> more or less the same ways. That, I don't think, is unreasonable. Its like as if
> you went to the hardware store to buy a hammer but all they had were hammers
> with curved handles and thus you had to relearn hammering nails anew. Not
> something one would want to be forced to do. The lack of a general purpose
> cursor, to my way of thinking, is just that basic and it really threw me for a
> loop.
>
> WHY do new users expect expect similarity with P'shop? My guess is that more
> users than not are casual users who use it far less than professionals. Indeed,
> that is the major attraction of free software; we don't want to pay $600 + for
> something used only infrequently and thus we are frustrated to find such a steep
> learning curve since money doesn't constitute the only form of investment -
> there's the matter of invested time.
>
> I was hoping that there was some sort of basic design philosophy that I was
> missing that would, upon learning of it, would ease the transition. Apparently
> not. GIMP is merely different not by any conceptual means. I don't see any
> reasons for the differences but the reality is that I just have to be patience
> and take the time to relearn.
>


_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Ross Martinek
While I wouldn’t consider myself “proficient” in Photoshop, except for the things I did most often, I wasn’t a casual user, either. So I’m sort of in the middle.

>> No, I merely expected a similarity of tools that worked in
>> more or less the same ways. That, I don't think, is unreasonable.

Actually, it is understandable, but it is not reasonable—from the perspective of the GIMP weltanshauung. It is understandable because of the similarities in the tools and even their icons: this is the paintbrush tool, so it must be similar to the paintbrush tool in GIMP. Similar, yes, the same, no. Let me give you an analogy.

I was once, long ago, fluent in Latin. Romanian is the closest modern equivalent, closer than Spanish. When dealing with written Romanian, Latin was a help, but it by no means made the language clear with little effort. I had to study to understand the (sometimes critical) differences. It was worse with Spanish—I gave up. %-{

Easier to learn the “language” as an original, occasionally helped by an unexpected close similarity. So it is with the language of GIMP. Once I stopped thinking, “This must be similar to Photoshop,” things got much easier. It has been the same with every graphics program I’ve ever used, starting with “MacPaint,” followed by “Superpaint,” and Deneba’s “Canvas," and finally "PhotoShop” As soon as I started treating then as separate “languages," things got much easier.

Versteh? հասկանալ? સમજવું? เข้าใจ? سمجھنے? (Get my drift?)

=^D

Ross


> On Feb 17, 2017, at 6:45 PM, Mark Morin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> You say that you are not trying to unduly critical of gimp. By that I
> take it to mean that you are trying to be duly critical of gimp. That is
> the way that you are coming across.  Have you considered the possibility
> that the answers to your questions is: because that's the way it is.
> Gimp is not photoshop. Any expectation for it to look like or act like
> photoshop is unrealistic. The internet is not a hardware store where all
> that is available is one product. If you don't like what you see move on
> to something else.
>
> If the casual user picks up gimp because he or she doesn't want to shell
> out hundreds of dollars for a program that she or he may use once in a
> blue moon, it is safe to assume that the person in question is not an
> experienced photoshop user. Therefore, there would be no unlearning
> curve as the person got used to using gimp after having become
> proficient in photoshop. If that person is proficient in photoshop such
> that they need to unlearn things to use gimp then they probably are not
> a casual user of photoshop. Thus, new users to gimp (in your words
> "casual users"), who are using it for the reason you give, probably
> don't expect it to perform like photoshop. They simply expect it to
> perform as it performs because that's all they know.
>
> Photoshop is not the gold standard by which all other programs are to be
> evaluated. One could just as legitimately ask why photoshop's UI is not
> like gimp's and what the underlying rationale is for their UI. Gimp is
> not nor ever was and never will be a "free version of photoshop."
>
> I hope that you are feeling better.
>
>
> On 2/17/2017 2:56 PM, Boxman wrote:
>>> Good point -whether a user thinks Krita or GIMP is "more like
>>> PhotoShop"
>>> might depend on which version of Photoshop they've used. I'm only
>>> familiar with one version of PhotoShop, and that's CS2 on Windows.
>>> Maybe
>>> PhotoShop on Mac has a substantially different UI, and maybe CC looks
>>> substantially different than CS2.
>>> Another good point. On Photoshop I only ever edited photographs,
>>> mostly
>>> starting from a raw file, and never tried to paint using PhotoShop.
>>> Maybe Krita's paint tools resemble PhotoShop's paint tools.
>>>
>>> Elle
>> Shortly after I posted last week, I had a medical crisis and ended up in
>> hospital, so that's the reason I haven't responded to any of these posts over
>> the last week. As I said, I'm not looking to be unduely critical OF gimp, just
>> looking for some answers. And no, I'm not saying that I think GIMP should be
>> more like P'shop. No, I merely expected a similarity of tools that worked in
>> more or less the same ways. That, I don't think, is unreasonable. Its like as if
>> you went to the hardware store to buy a hammer but all they had were hammers
>> with curved handles and thus you had to relearn hammering nails anew. Not
>> something one would want to be forced to do. The lack of a general purpose
>> cursor, to my way of thinking, is just that basic and it really threw me for a
>> loop.
>>
>> WHY do new users expect expect similarity with P'shop? My guess is that more
>> users than not are casual users who use it far less than professionals. Indeed,
>> that is the major attraction of free software; we don't want to pay $600 + for
>> something used only infrequently and thus we are frustrated to find such a steep
>> learning curve since money doesn't constitute the only form of investment -
>> there's the matter of invested time.
>>
>> I was hoping that there was some sort of basic design philosophy that I was
>> missing that would, upon learning of it, would ease the transition. Apparently
>> not. GIMP is merely different not by any conceptual means. I don't see any
>> reasons for the differences but the reality is that I just have to be patience
>> and take the time to relearn.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-user-list mailing list
> List address:    [hidden email]
> List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Alexandre Prokoudine
In reply to this post by Mark Morin-2
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 3:45 AM, Mark Morin wrote:

> Photoshop is not the gold standard by which all other programs are to be
> evaluated.

It is. Sadly so.

> One could just as legitimately ask why photoshop's UI is not
> like gimp's

1. Photoshop predates GIMP by 10+ years
2. GIMP contributors specifically copied some of its features in the past.

Would you like to reconsider your point? :)

> Gimp is not nor ever was and never will be a "free version of photoshop."

True.

Alex
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Weird forum and layout

Joel Rees
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 3:45 AM, Mark Morin wrote:
>
>> Photoshop is not the gold standard by which all other programs are to be
>> evaluated.
>
> It is. Sadly so.

Speaking without metaphor:

Gold standards only exist in  the minds of those who think gold standards exist.

Speaking in metaphor:

For those willing to use a different currency, gold is just another
metal with some really useful properties that is harder to get access
to because people want to use it for something it is not.

>> One could just as legitimately ask why photoshop's UI is not
>> like gimp's
>
> 1. Photoshop predates GIMP by 10+ years

For real graphics artists, Adobe is a latecomer and still an outsider.

> 2. GIMP contributors specifically copied some of its features in the past.

Most of those features well predate Adobe and the software they built
Photoshop's original version on top of.

> Would you like to reconsider your point? :)
>
>> Gimp is not nor ever was and never will be a "free version of photoshop."
>
> True.
>
> Alex

:-)

--
Joel Rees

I'm imagining I'm a novelist:
http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html
More of my delusions:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html
_______________________________________________
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    [hidden email]
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list