>GIMP has a single-window mode Why the fuck isn't

>>52409437
Because it's fucking GIMP.
Go use paint.net if you're so butthurt about it.

Because GIMP is shit.

>>52409437
Because it's fucking GIMP.
Go use paint.net if you want a good user experience.

Paint.NEET memes aside, this is as close as an explanation you're going to get, methinks http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/Single-window_mode_specification#reminder

because no-proprietary software developers/consumers lust after unneeded complexity. Hell, most people from/g/ wish you had to compile your own image viewer just to render the shitty picture they created or chopped.

File: 1904012.jpg (24KB, 604x437px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 604x437px

>>52409466
>>52409518

>>52409607
More like 1/99

The GIMP devs are well known for being against UI design changes that might attract users, align with standard UI conventions, or, you know, make sense. The idiots hired a professional UI designer and then fired him when they didn't like what he had to say.

>>52412843
You, I really wish I had more time to fork projects away from stupid developers.

>>52409437
Rumor has it GIMP is actually population control, the government and Adobe are paying the developers to make it so bad that people kill themselves over it.

>>52412843
in fairness a lot of modern UX is just trend-following and graphic-design wankery. The thing that matters is if the UI is consistent, and remains so from version to version. Though GIMP has problems in this area too, I'm told.

Guys I've been on /g for far too long and week in- week out I see at least one thread berating Gimp.

I've used Gimp for many years and recently have been using it to make slideshow advertisements for my workplace. For image manipulation: it does the job, for content creation: I never bothered.

The UI doesn't annoy me, but in these threads I see nearly every person bitching about the UI.

As a person who has never used Photoshop and presently doesn't need to.

What is bad about Gimp's UI? Can you give me examples?

>>52412843
Is it functionally comparable to Photoshop?

>>52413163
Nothing is bad about it's UI , no matter what image manipulator you use you gotta get used to it either way.
These people are just autistic.

>>52413163
>>never used photoshop
There's your answer

>Wanting to be confined to a single window
For what purpose?

>devs turn it on by default

>>GIMP has a multi-window mode
>Why the fuck isn't it on by default?

>>52409437
Because they assume if you edit images maybe you want to use multiple monitors. Multiwindow mode is much better in that case.

>>52412803
1/99 of what

>>52413382
Photoshop's UI is just as bad as GIMP, don't kid yourself

>>52415501
u r wong

freetards cannot into gui design and workflow

>>52413192
To photoshop as it was in the late 90s, yes. So version 5 or maybe 6. To modern Photoshop CS6 or CC, no way.

>>52409437
Because the devs are cucks

Is it able to process CMYK nowadays?

>>52415860
no

>>52413163
>What is bad about Gimp's UI? Can you give me examples?
It's bloated, unnecessary elements take a lot of space, layer management is just stupid, you can't undo many operations if you change your mind later, for example remove shadow from an element (or, more likely, if your client changes his mind). Also, the defaults are usually not what you would want. Also, does it have CMYK without 3rd party plugins yet?
Overall, GIMP is ok for amateur and/or personal work, but has no place in a professional setting when you have clients

>>52413163
it's fucking autismal shit why would you even use this crap, fucking Gahnoo/Looniks poorfags shut the fuck up

Probably because people who edit images have more than one screen and can drag the two smaller windows to another screen so they can fullscreen the one with image.

>>52415860
There's this https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/CMYK_support_in_The_GIMP

>>52415973
But professionals or people who care about image editing shell out for photoshop, GIMP caters to people who do basic editing.

>>52415501
Correct
>>52413382
No its shit

>2016
>click on a layer
>press delete
>layer is still there

Why? Why? Gimp has the worst UI in free world.

>>52416494
> complaining about something so insignificant

You sound like a Macfag.

I want to hold hands with GIMP.

>>52415501
not even close brah, nice try though

I for one like the multi windowed mode.
The tabs make it more flexible, I don't need to extend the UI over the image everytime I need to open a contextual setting box.

File: peppers__by_bbtdgfan882-d7cfdaz.png (537KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 800x600px

>>52413192
Can your photoshop do this?

>>52416494
Eh, it deletes the image in the layer which is useful. Just a different convention. There's far bigger things to complain about in GIMP.

>>52418644
It was just a simple things where GIMP failed. There is a lot of more complex things where GIMP totally failed. But failing at such a simple task, is enough to prove that complex tasks are worst.

They would get sued by Adobe

>>52413163
>I enjoy eating shit, but everyone I talk to doesn't even want to touch it.
>What is so bad about eating shit? Can you give me examples?

Whats the problem with multi window mode?

>>52415461
1 to 99 nigga real quick

>>52419041
Wut?

I've been using Gimp for years but I still find it awkward to work with.

I always loved how intuitive Adobe/Macromedia Fireworks was. But the assholes scraped it.

>>52419012
Wow dude. Nice hostile comment. I bet you get upset when people don't agree with everything you say don't you? Fucking austist.

Alright /g/ if GIMP is so shit what should I use instead?

>>52413037
>in fairness a lot of modern UX is just trend-following and graphic-design wankery
If the current trend moves towards all software being laid out in a similar way then breaking the trend makes your software unintuitive. Following trends is not a bad thing.
As for graphical wankery, well, can't have an image manipulation tool actually look attractive, can we?

File: 1411292777338.gif (1MB, 224x379px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 224x379px

it's for multi monitor setups you retards. Aka what anyone in media/image editing uses for their work. You have one screen just for the canvas and you keep your tool kits on the other screen.

Fucking summer, I swear.

>>52420403
>Aka what anyone in media/image editing uses for their work.
I work for a company that provides a set of services for real estate agents. We have five photographers. All these photographers have pretty beefy computers for editing their pictures. Not a single one has more than one monitor. They all use photoshop and lightroom.

Most people just don't see the attraction of more than one monitor and it's certainly not attractive enough for most photographers to pay for more than one very expensive, colour accurate monitor.

>>52409437
>single-window GIMP
Your WM is broken, change it.

>>52419013
Too difficult for normies

>can't move layers to specific coordinates
>requires a 3rd party script

>>52420761
The move tool shows the coordinates of the pointer when moving, can't you use that?

There is a market for alternatives to photoshop in the professional field. A lot of people are switching over to programs like pixelmator, affinity and sketch. It has always been my hope that a foss program take that place but it seems unlikely. I really love what krita is doing, fast development and good focus on feedback from users. Wish gimp was more like krita in that regard.

>>52413037
The trends are not successful if people don't like it. >>52416637
The whole reason Steve Jobs was successful was because he cared about "the little things"
Retard

Still can't edit rotated text

>>52419065
You should follow the link in the post he quoted (>>52409607)

It will make sense then.

>>52409607
>50% of users want to keep the current multi-window way
That fucking delusion

>>52420504
The toolkit monitor would really need to be colour accurate, tho.

>>52421565
I just ran through the idea of setting that up for the photographers. I can hear each an every one screeching at me for something minor. First comes the Italian woman, with that cartoonishly bad accent and the exaggerated hand gestures. Every sentence sounds like an accusation and goes along the lines of "Why I must do this? Why not it goes like this?"

I could go on about the others but to cut it short, you gave me a headache anon, fuck you, I'm going to go drown my sorrows in a bottle of whiskey.

These threads pop up whenever things get slow in the adobe inc. mailroom. They put the lackeys on shill duty, instead of having them sit on their fat faggot asses all afternoon.

because they just don't care senpai

>>52420504
>photographers

>>52422568
Yeah, you know, annoying creatures. Usually loud, go wherever they want, disregard signs, don't care what other people think of what they're doing, completely ignorant of anything but what's in focus and so on and so forth.

There's a reason I don't go to the company parties any more.

Adobe must be pretty scared of gimp to send this many shills to 4chan.

>>52413382
>>52413163
Not him, but i've used both PS and GIMP, and I use GIMP instead of PS because I think PS's is terrible.

If I want to just shift the HSV on an image, in gimp, that takes me 2 clicks to get to that menu: Color > HSV

In Ps, that's like 6 clicks, I have to go thrrough like 5 submenus to do that: Image > transform > Color > HSV > adjust or something like that.

There's also a bunch of windows usng up space that I don't need in PS that I can't remove, unlike in GIMP

Maybe it's changed since I last used it though, it's been like 6 years.

>>52415501
this is blatantly untrue

>>52409437
You need a better WM. Oh wait, you can't!

>>52415613
>>52416675
>>52425191
Photoshop's UI is as poor as Gimp's UI. Photoshop makes heavy use of mode as does Gimp. The more modes you use, the heavier cognitive burden there is to the user. Photoshop's UI requires just as much training as Gimp does. Photoshop's Fitts Law score is equally as poor as Gimp.

until gimp can actually handle RAW files without shitting itself (aka: limiting itself to 8 bit color only, being able to actually compete with adobe camera raw), and until something even comes close to content aware, photoshop will ALWAYS be the superior choice.

always

File: 1357018274295.png (802B, 120x106px) Image search: [Google]

802B, 120x106px

>>52409437
OP I did not know this existed until you brought it up.