Photoshop FOSS alternative GIMP wakes up from 7-year coma with version 3.0 After a seven-year nap, version 3.0 of FOSS image editor GIMP is arriving with a splash, while a long-dormant open video format wakes from its slumbers and lumbers into beta. It's the first new release for the FOSS Photoshop alternative since GIMP 2.10 back in 2018, and it's five years since the first development release. We …
The Debian distro and those such as Devuan that follow it closely do freeze major versions for the life of a release. There will be updates during the life of the release but not major version updates. It's why they are regarded as (a) stable and (b) likely to get a bit out of date. There's nothing to stop some other project providing its own repository which a user may then include alongside the official ones. Alternatively a project may just provide their own .deb files to download by hand, e.g. LibreOffice..
It's also possible for a project to provide a tarball of either source to compile or binary to install. Pinta is an example of a source tarball and the expected behaviour of make install after a local compile is to install into /usr/local. Seamonkey an example of the latter which I uncompress into /opt although a user could equally well install into a home directory. LibreOffice .debs also install into /opt. AFAICS Flatpak & the rest are non-KISS reinventions of the /opt approach.
Gimp 3 has, in fact, made it into Devuan next but it's going to need a lot of work before it becomes Devuan current.
Just FYI, Darktable1 and RawTherapee both open at least some forms of the FUJIFILM RAW file (.RAF).
Last I tried, compressed RAW is still problematic2, though.
Since I do all my raw processing in Darktable and any postprocessing in either Gimp or RawTherapee as PNG, I'm happy.
________________
1 5.0.1, that is. 5.0 had some problems, getting the color channels all mucked up.
2 As in not working at all.
Following up, I tried installing LIghtzone 4.2.4 and it seems to have a major bug in the RAW file reader. It won't read .RAF, .DNG, or .NEF at all. Its Github Issues page confirms this.
Caveat emptor.
____________________
Thanks for the heads up. I'll give 5.0.0~beta2 a whirl when I get a chance.
The UI looks nice and far less complicated than either Darktable or RawTherapee (and, at the risk of attracting downvotes, the 'pee' bit of RT has always mildly put me off, I mean come on, what are we, six year olds?).
Raw formats are actually proprietary (Photoshop uses their own format to approximate them based on TIFF). For GIMP you'll need to use a RAW format processor like RawTherapee or Darktable which are equivalents of Adobe Lightroom. When you drag a raw file into GIMP with one of them installed it will ask you for permission to open the file in whichever program you have. You set whatever parameters you want in RawTherapee/Darktable, then when you close it the image will open in GIMP.
Photoshop uses Adobe Camera Raw to read those files and load them into Photoshop - the engine is the same used by Ligthroom - then you can save them in any format you like. There's also the DNG converter that transforms a camera RAW file into the Adobe DNG format, which is still a raw format designed by Adobe.
Many RAW formats are TIFF-like files, but they store (almost) unprocessed data from the camera sensor, plus specific information the camera can write there.
If I was a woke snowflake, I wouldn't object to it being called GIMP.
It's only Linux that has this much trouble going through puberty; and the only reason they get away with naming things like a sniggering teenager is because the product is free. If it cost any money at all, nobody would buy it.
Like I said; names matter.
Apparently, the word started out as a slur, then it became used more often to refer to the sexual goings on and, of course, nowadays, is also used to refer to a pretty neat piece of software.
Words do change their meaning over time and we could just let the oldest usage slide into oblivion, but there are those who are determined to keep that in the forefront of our minds.
It's only Linux that has this much trouble going through puberty
I think Telsa and anything Musk related has an even bigger issue. There's a reason why the Tesla model names are S, 3, X, Y, SpaceX has a thing named Mechazilla and Musk constantly makes reference to the numbers 69 and 420. It's that he's an overgrown, edge-lord child.
At the risk of being pedantic (!) it started out as the "General Image Manipulation Program", a student project, it was changed to "GNU ..." after it started to grow and the authors talked to Stallman; this is all described in their interview for The GIMP Gazette in 1997 they "also tossed around XIMP (X Image Manipulation Program) following the rule of when in doubt prefix an X for X11 based programs".
All of the main points about this are still in the GIMP documentation on its website: A Brief (and Ancient) History of GIMP.
But, yes, the released versions have always been spelt the same way.
True, but before then people would have complained that XIMP would be pronounced like ZIMP like CIMP like SIMP - and calling someone "a simp" is not exactly polite. Calling it - no, I can not bear to use that word, you know what it is - might be hailed as a great step forwards.
Although, looky here, googling for that shows the word "simp" has changed its meaning and now refers to someone who is too deferrent to women for a nearby misygonist to bear. A much lesser usage than what it used to mean.
"You could check the ancient source code. But you clearly prefer to make fool of yourself…"
GIMP v0.57 was released in 1997, and v1.0 in 1998. Gimp as a derogatory and ableist insult has been around since at least the beginning of the '90s, and was extensively referenced in Pulp Fiction (1994) as a BDSM submissive/slave reference.
Peter Mattis, one of the original creators of the Gimp, stated where the name came from in the GIMP Gazette: "At the time, Pulp Fiction was the hot movie and a single word popped into my mind while we were tossing out name ideas. It only took a few more minutes to determine what the 'G' stood for."
So it was quite literally a backronym; starting with the BDSM term and working backwards until they came up with something remotely justifiable to fill it.
What were you saying about making a fool of yourself?
> The INVENTOR quite LITERALLY said that he started with the name The Gimp, inspired by the BDSM slave submissive character in Pulp Fiction, and then worked backwards from this to find a name that fitted the acronym.
From the words of the INVENTOR, as per link already posted: in their interview for The GIMP Gazette:
>> We knew we wanted an image manipulation program like Photoshop, but the name IMP sounded wrong. We also tossed around XIMP (X Image Manipulation Program) following the rule of when in doubt prefix an X for X11 based programs. At the time, Pulp Fiction was the hot movie and a single word popped into my mind while we were tossing out name ideas. It only took a few more minutes to determine what the 'G' stood for.
They quite LITERALLY said that he started with the name IMP[1], wanted ONE LETTER MORE, tried out an "X", *then* inspired by a word they'd heard in the film "Pulp Fiction".
> Which bit of this is difficult for you?
None of it. Let us turn that around:
Q: Which bit of this is difficult for you?
(apparent A: not being able to read, not being able to speak the truth)
[1] can *YOU* tell the difference between starting with "IMP" and starting with "GIMP" - note, *NOT* "The Gimp", just "GIMP".
For obvious reasons, I think it's a real shame that they didn't just call it IMP (Image Manipulation Program, as above). It would have been entirely inoffensive and it would have have had quite a nice (if not necessarily intentional) nod to how cameras work on Discworld, too…
"The INVENTOR quite LITERALLY said that he started with the name The Gimp, inspired by the BDSM slave submissive character in Pulp Fiction, and then worked backwards from this to find a name that fitted the acronym."
Quite literally not used as an ableist slur then.
Which bit of this is difficult for you?
The fact that it wasn't used as an ableist slur - which wasn't what the person you're criticising said anyway - doesn't mean it isn't one.
Words are wonderful things, and if you lack the imagination to use different ones if someone points out something is offensive, that's very much a "you" problem.
Quite literally not used as an ableist slur then.
When Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party, he wasn’t endorsing the Nazis. But it also wasn’t a very good idea.
When “Spaz” and “Spastic” became derogatory slurs, the Spastic Society rebranded to SCOPE.
It’s possible that the founders could have named GIMP after a Pulp Fiction reference, but also intend it as a slur, or be hanging onto it for ableist reasons, or are just being remarkably blasé about continuing to use a childish name.
Fact is, it wouldn’t actually be too hard to change if we’re just concerned about the public name on the executable, the title bar and in the “About” dialog. It doesn’t need every code comment switching out. Infrastructure (domains, etc) would be more work, but it’s probably something they should be working towards.
One group even forked it a few years back (to “Glimpse”) with no intention of developing it independently, but just maintaining a parallel rebranded version that a school might consider installing, and which won’t make your boss look twice when they pass by your desk.
No idea why your post is being downvoted given that it's entirely factually accurate and a lot of the people complaining about what you're saying and getting quite upset are of the "facts don't care about your feelings" variety.
But when they say that, what they really mean is, of course, "I don't care about your feelings (but I'll sure as hell complain if you do anything hurt mine)".
I don't *entirely* agree with you, as it's clear that at the time of the backronym coming about, it's unlikely the original creators thought of it as derogatory. It was just a funny thing from a movie. But we're long past that now, and the fact that some people want to cling on to the past is their problem.
I strongly suspect most of those downvoting never got past the 'sniggering teenager' phase themselves. And I agree the original intent was more humorous than derogatory, and they probably never expected the program would become such a huge hit. If you anticipate your user base never being more than a few thousand Linux nerds, then why bother giving it a 'professional' name?
But here we are. Professional people including myself would like to use it in a professional context, but won't because of the childishly offensive name.
As a kid in the UK (late 60's, early 70's), I remember the term being used as a term for disabled, but in the way being described here, eg oh, look, he;s a gimp" but more along the lines of "yeah, I have a gimpy leg", or "he can;t do that, he's got a gimpy arm". More a descriptive terms than specifically an insulting term. My exposure to it as a sexual term possibly pre-dates my introduction to the "gimp mask" icon here, but not as a top level memory, just something I was probably aware of. I had no clue the terms was even referenced in Pulp Fiction partly because that's not my idea of a film I want to watch and the trailers showing that weird Travolta "dance" completely turned me off from it anyway. But than that;s just my experience.
Either way, context is everything, and my most common experience of new words in English seems to be group naming and labelling coming out of the USA. They seem to have a fetish for naming everything, even when there is already name for whatever they are naming. Worse, naming a group of people is often not only insulting in the way it's done, it often ends up backfiring by giving that "group" power. eg so-called incels. (and I might even be wrong in that specific instance, for all I know the origin of that term may have been the group themselves.) And lets; not go near the ridiculous "grouping" of entire generations of people as "boomers", Gen X, Y, Z, millennials etc (What comes after Z anyway?) and assigning millions specific traits based on which year or decade they were born in.
And "Millennial" is used as an insult, so I guess those people would never use Windows Millennium Edition either! Oh, wait....
> "GNU Image Manipulation Program" is clearly a backronym invented to justify an edgelord ableist slur.
> backronym
They were choosing ONE LETTER to go with the "IMP" they already had, rejected "X" and then remembered a word from a film.
> clearly ... invented to justify an edgelord ableist slur.
"edgelord" - (shakes head at the depths being plumbed)
"Justify a slur"? Citation needed. You have definitive proof that they were in a situation where the word was used as slur, that they knew that and that thery deliberately and willfully decided to go with that interpretation? Citation most definitely needed.
You *may* have had a reasonable case for saying "a group of people, I do not know how large it is but I am one, prefer not to use this word in any context and wish to see the program change its name".
But now you are making such unjustified and unproven allegations that you lose all credibility in this matter.
"I got busted?"
Yes. You denied it was a backronym, then when confronted with prima facie evidence and citations from the literal creator of the app (https://www.xach.com/gg/1997/1/profile/1/) you backtracked into a "Yeah but it's not MUCH of a backronym, so there" argument.
Busted.
FWIW I was introduced to GIMP at work, in a perfectly professional environment (those who ventured outside all wore suits, we all filled in the relevant due diligence forms etc etc, as well as getting to actually write code and do the good stuff).
Nobody ever really cared one jot about it, beyond "that looks useful, can I have a copy?" (at which point we'd just refer them, as I was, to the internal webpages[1] with instructions).
As grown ups, we just took a useful tool and used it. No snickering - or any other reaction, really.
Since then, it has just been around in all my later jobs - in one, which runs a security system that gets vetted by the MoD, engineering did have to put in a formal note to say we'd like to have it added to the list of available tools to which the response was - ok, fine, we'll virus check it for you the first time (later we had to tell them not to download it from SourceForge, but that is a whole other story).
[1] before the days of this "Intranet" malarkey
How about GIM or GIP? GNU Image Manipulation / GNU Image Processor
Adding the P for Program is a forced acronym. How many other programs can you think of with Program in the name? It’s only there for cheap laughs.
It’s a widespread problem in the industry. I’ve worked on a major codebase where the key data structure is called SLUT. For Symbol Lookup Table, obviously. Various people pushed back strong and hard against renaming it, despite that: it didn’t meet coding guidelines; search-and-replace is trivial; other variables were routinely re-named ad hoc during refactoring for “readability”.
It’s bullshit, and we shouldn’t allow this crap. Gas-lighting that the naming is nothing to do with the standard usage of the words, is part of it being very not-okay.
"Grow the fuck up, Linux nerds. Names matter."
No they don't. I don't give a damn what something is called as long as it does the job. You are at perfect liberty to use, or not use, the software for any reason whatsoever - I think you will find that nobody cares about that, either - so if names disturb you so deeply, feel free to avoid Gimp like the plague.
Meanwhile, in the real world, plenty of folks who find gimp useful will be working productively with a powerful piece of software that does what they want and costs them nothing.
Personally, I haven't had much need for its services for a year or two, but gimp is still one of the first things I install on a new machine, and it's likely to remain so unless they've seriously fucked it up. It's certainly on my desktop and laptop (Windows 10 and 11 respectively), and I'm looking forward to trying out the new version.
I assume you will not be joining the party - your loss.
"I assume you will not be joining the party - your loss."
It's really not my loss; I won't miss it.
On a much more serious note - I use my laptop for business purposes, and I regularly connect and share my screen with senior, older, business leaders who do not work in the tech world and wouldn't know Linux from a lightbulb. You might know them as boomers or GenX.
If I had a program called Gimp on my laptop and these people didn't know what it was (which most won't), then I would expect some strong opinions to be expressed. "Keep your dirty little porn habits on your private laptop, they don't belong in a work meeting", and so on, Worst case, I could lose business because they keep their opinions to themselves, but make a private decision to not move forward because they think it's weird.
Names matter.
"I am impressed that the folk you refer to are scrutinising your screenshots in such detail as to see GIMP. I am also surprised that you're sharing your desktop rather than a program."
Trust me, they do analyse what they see onscreen; as do most human beings. And as a lot of my work involves demonstrating interactions between programs, and I need to be able to show how information flows from one to the other, sharing the screen rather than the app is by far the simplest way to do it.
Otherwise it's:
- Share app1.
- Demo the first script.
- Stop sharing app1.
- Start sharing app2 where data has already been imported but it's not clear what changed because they couldn't see it happen and they got confused.
- Explain where the changes came from.
- Demo the second script.
- Stop sharing app2.
- Go back to app1 and share that.
- Spend an hour explaining why nothing looks the same any more because data has been updated.
As opposed to:
- Share screen with app1 and app2 both running.
- Run scripts, see changes in realtime in both apps.
- Bask in the glory of non-tech people saying "ooh I get it now."
You might know them as boomers or GenX
I don't know much about boomers (the ones I know are far less prude than the current woke snowflake brigade), but you obviously have no clue about how GenX-ers think. Or, alternatively, your so incompetent in your work that they tolerate you only because you show your submission to hierarchy in such a obvious way.
No, names don't matter to competent professional people
They really don't.
In other less ridiculously woke countries, this might be remotely plausible; but you're talking about Starmer's Britain here; the country where it's a crime to use hurty words, where you get arrested for saying that two gay swimmers can go and bum each other, and sends grandmothers to prison for saying that the mosque where the Southport killer went should be 'blown up'.
This is Britain now. And you're suggesting that a program that is both a grossly offensive ableist insult and quite literally named after a BDSM portrayal, would be taught in primary schools?
Ahhhh. Now you've revealed your true colours, and effectively voided all your previous posts on the subject.
Though I'm surprised that such a daily mail reading paranoid alt-right reform voter like you would object to "gimp". Your previous posts completely contradict your latest reveal.
I guess it's just gays and foreigners you think it's ok to abuse? Careful, some might consider that a bit "woke"
Big words, based on nothing and contrary to any and all evidence. If I actually was a "daily mail reading paranoid alt-right reform voter" then I would probably be happy with calling software Gimp - along with any other insulting terms I could come up with. It's typically left-leaning types that want to police words, although I'm not that either.
Anyway. Point being: you're inventing things out of thin air and trying to reason with you would be like trying to pin steam to a wall. Pointless. Off you trot now.
"grossly offensive ableist insult "
Is it? I have never heard it used in that way in the 54 years I've been on this planet. GIMP is the bloke in the leather from Pulp Fiction.
"quite literally named after a BDSM portrayal"
You don't have to teach the kids the other meaning of the word. Teach them to use the software. Teach them the acronym. I very much doubt they'd care either way.
Seriously dude, what's up your ass?
Gimp (n): In any of its meanings, deeply insulting, unpleasant, or otherwise, (a stupid person, a person with a physical disability, a sadomasochistic sexual partner, a trimming, a fishing-line)
Here's another reference from the British-American Dictionary: Gimp (n): British pejorative childhood slang for fool or idiot
Going by your handle I don't know if you're UK based, but if you're not you should probably look it up first before commenting. Saves you looking like a gimp.
>> I have never heard it used in that way in the 54 years I've been on this planet
> (references in dictionaries)
> you should probably look it up first before commenting
There are many defintions of words in dictionaries, recording the myriad ways they have been used in the past and in the present; being able to demonstrate a dictionary definition of a word indicates nothing - not a sausage, nada - about whether somebody has ever come across that usage of the word.
> Saves you looking like a gimp.
As would responding to what somebody actually reported in their comment.
This post has been deleted by its author
The fartist formerly known as Lord Elpuss found himself addicted to defending the indefensible serially against all comers, changed his handle to Gôdel P May and joined Timewasters Anonymous.
More seriously, terms such as nerd, gimp, geek, etc. describe both my profession and my attitude pleasantly accurately and I often describe myself as such with pride.* I know furries who regard the GIMP logo as a self-portrait.
As a kid in the postwar Golden Age of SF, I read a good few stories by American authors with a lame war veteran nicknamed Gimpy. There was no suggestion of any kind of slur, just fond comradeship. Here in the UK, I also like my Brains faggots in gravy, still on sale despite the best the PC fartists could throw at them.
* Nothing to do with gay lions, some of you may be sad to hear.
The name clearly rattles your cage, but it really doesn't bother plenty of others. No one is forcing you to use it.
You're right, of course, words do matter, but so does context and learning to pick our fights.
Not quite sure why you feel the need to make such a fuss about this particular label. There are plenty more egregious, cynical and downright evil uses of language out there. On the continuum of meaning and usage 'GIMP' really doesn't rate a mention.
Not making a fuss. Simply saying I won't be installing it while it's called The Gimp; I've moved on to other products that better fit my needs. Everything else has been action/reaction.
The "fuss" is from the vocal minority here who (a) didn't believe that the software was genuinely named after a BDSM film character, and/or think that their view of what is "right" and "proper" is the only view, and anybody with a different view is - well, being a gimp.
Where did I feign surprise at the reaction? Nowhere, is the answer; so don’t waste your time looking.
Re not worrying about what others think; that must be nice. Personally my financial livelihood depends on clients seeing me as a mature business professional; these clients are typically older, principled, and extremely wealthy; so they can make snap decisions about whether I’m the “type” they want to do business with; and if not they have plenty of other options.
So yes, I do care about what they think. Certainly when it comes to the relatively low effort involved in not installing a piece of software with a childishly shit name.
Well, it clearly bothers you, but the question remains why you even thought it worth mentioning. As I said there are far worse things being done with words than an adolescent acronym being nailed to a very useful bit of software. Why not go chasing after the those uses of words that really are hurting people?
And the feigning thing, I have no doubt you already knew perfectly well what the general view of 'the GIMP' is as a label. Same as it always has been—something you either live with, deal with creatively, or walk away from. You've stirred the pot, but no prizes for the resulting mess.
Every comment since my first one - every single one - has been a response to somebody else who's got their panties in a bunch about the fact that years ago, I made a personal choice not to install an app due to the name.
For a group that's ostensibly driven by freedom of choice, Linux geeks sure are touchy about people who don't conform to their view of the 'correct' choice. If y'all didn't keep hammering on about it, I wouldn't still be here. Feel free to prove my point by not responding.
Six times. Six times I’ve cited this unequivocal fact in the course of this discussion.
Six times you’ve either failed to see it, failed to understand it, or failed to retain it.
Knowledge talks, wisdom listens. Try listening every once in a while, especially to those who very clearly know more than you do.
...and now the (gimp) mask has come off the anger. You're clearly not amused. And your citation proves nothing except that you missed the point again; it is indeed clear that the name originates from a BDSM reference, and I have never questioned that. You, however, are stuck on thinking about an entirely different definition of the word.
At least in the US and Canada, where I note that I am not, one of the OTHER meanings is derogatory (see https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/gimp). Gimp, in its original BDSM context - the context in which the name was created, as you so helpfully keep pointing out - is not offensive. That is, unless you find certain (legal between consenting adults) sexual preferences offensive, which would be your own problem.
Do you fly into a similar rage when someone refers to a "coloured" pencil? Do you also complain when someone talks about getting "legless" drunk? There's a massive rack of words that can be taken the wrong way if you force it hard enough. If we all took such offence whenever a word could be intentionally misconstrued, our communications would be crippled.
You seem to be actively seeking a way to be offended by conflating the BDSM gimp and the "ableist" gimp, which is very childish. Such an extreme and misplaced level of anger shows a very low level of emotional maturity.
"You seem to be actively seeking a way to be offended by conflating the BDSM gimp and the "ableist" gimp, which is very childish."
It doesn't interest me which one of these meanings is the 'more' offensive; the only thing I care about is that at least one of the meanings of the word can be considered offensive. And for this reason, I won't install it on my work laptop. For the simple reason that I have a lot of older, technophobic clients who could see it as unprofessional, and consequently choose to take their business elsewhere. That's it. That is the entire issue. There is nothing else.
I've stated this throughout, however for the hard of thinking here is one example.
"I use my laptop for business purposes, and I regularly connect and share my screen with senior, older, business leaders who do not work in the tech world and wouldn't know Linux from a lightbulb. You might know them as boomers or GenX.
If I had a program called Gimp on my laptop and these people didn't know what it was (which most won't), then I would expect some strong opinions to be expressed. "Keep your dirty little porn habits on your private laptop, they don't belong in a work meeting", and so on, Worst case, I could lose business because they keep their opinions to themselves, but make a private decision to not move forward because they think it's weird."
You can choose to continue to manufacture scenarios in your head where you believe I am saying 'x' or conflating 'y'; I can't control your delusions. I can only state the facts. Which is what I've been doing since the beginning.
I love how you're so invested in this that you keep coming back for more. I've literally told you that I'm basically being a troll, and yet you still seem to have a deep need to respond to me.
You're not stating facts, you're giving opinions. Very strong ones. And any apparent facts you've supplied, such as your complete misunderstanding of the truncated text in the paywalled link to Fowler on Oxford Reference you posted, two weeks ago now, are largely misinterpretations (read it again carefully and see if you can understand what it's really about to go on to say).
While you continue to shout your opinions in the vain hope that someone will finally tell you they're the right ones and that the other opinions were wrong after all, leaving you vindicated (spoiler: nobody is going to do that), I'll be here for you, just as long as you need me.
Let’s do this step by step for the hard of thinking.
First question. Is it, or is it not, a FACT that one of the meanings of the word Gimp is a BDSM fetish reference?
Second question. Is it, or is it not, a FACT that the author of the software program The GIMP publicly stated that the inspiration for the name of the program came from the BDSM fetish character in the 1994 film Pulp Fiction?
Ah, I'm so pleased that you've nothing better to do than to continue shouting your opinions into the void (although I note that weirdly, from the vote counts, there do still seem to be a few other people watching). I also have nothing better to do than to keep you replying, as I'm avoiding work right now, and I enjoy providing this public service. As I said, I'm here for you as long as you need me.
First question. Is it, or is it not, a FACT that it is your OPINION that either of these things is a problem?
Second question. Is it, or is it not a FACT that your OPINION regarding the offensiveness, relevance, or general whogivesafuckness of the term "gimp" is what you keep pushing here?
The things you seem to think are important in this case are simply your opinions, and you don't seem able to see that it's possible for people to disagree with your opinions. Perhaps, like a toddler, you've yet to fully develop a theory of mind.
See also this: https://xkcd.com/386/
And thank you for finally agreeing that you were the one avoiding my points; I'm still confused as to why it took you so long to realise I had long ago answered your questions. And it pleases me to think of you taking the time to copy and paste my post into Word just to provide me with an accurate word count. In any case, all I did in the previous post was repeat myself, as you now have in your post. Although I note that you feel the need to put the word "yes" (in bold) into my mouth twice, practically grabbing my jaw and moving it in an attempt at ventriloquism, as though me personally saying this word is what you need for that sweet, sweet endorphin rush of "being right" that you so crave. Please, take it, if it is what your ego requires.
Nonetheless, as I have already stated several times, we do not agree on anything other than the facts of the origin of the name, and you have been boxing with an imaginary shadow about that the whole time. Beyond the facts, you again present your opinions and speculations: "I would expect", "I could", "might see it". You have the opinion that the name is or might be a problem and that other people might find it to be a problem. Others do not believe it is an issue. This is the point that I have been making - and you have been ignoring - all along; this, my dear fellow, is a fact. While I do detect a slight shuffling towards the door of a humble exit, you still seem to bask in the dark ignorance of the validity of others' perspectives.
For someone who has stated or implied on several occasions that they are "over it", you clearly aren't, as you continue to push your opinion in the vain hope that people will find themselves on the road to Damascus and see you as a Christlike purveyor of Truth as the scales fall from their eyes. But please, do continue, or indeed exit if you wish.
Ah, and there it is, laid bare - the need for validation; seeking any morsel by which you might feel vindicated. "You said I was not presenting facts, but look! These particular things I said were factual! Therefore you're a fool and I am right! Haha! I am CORRECT and nobody can contradict me!" Perhaps this need stems from a lack of validation at work, or maybe in your home life. Perhaps your need to "prove" someone else wrong is a result of an uncomfortable relationship with your parents as a child - who knows! Whatever its root, the fear you have is that of death: the death of that part of the ego which is "right". If you don't receive your validation, then this segment of your ego must continue to fight, and to fight as if it were for your very survival!
Nonetheless, this quest is vanity; the only route to contentment lies within, and true peace cannot be obtained through any form of external validation. Any validation so received will be aught but a mere flash of dopamine, too like the lightning, which doth cease to be ere one can say, "it lightens". If the calming of that inner voice of anger is what you seek, you must find such contentment from within yourself, through acceptance of what /is/, letting go of the rage against external reality. But I digress; this is not the issue at hand. As you rightly point out (oops - don't take that as validation, it wouldn't be good for you in the long run!), I should be getting to the point, so I shall.
Whatever the cause of your need to feel validated as a person, you seek to deflect from the actual issue here, which is that you have the opinion that something is offensive, and others have the opinion that it is not; contrasting with this reality, you seem to believe that you are presenting a fundamental truth or verifiable fact. Herein lies the contradiction that keeps you coming back in vain. You now have two choices: continue to argue in vain against the reality that people have different opinions on this issue and that yours is not definitive, or accept that it's okay to disagree about things. It's okay to let go: it won't make you "wrong", and the death will not be a real death. You need not continue to fear it.
And there you go again, projecting yourself onto others: it's quite a solipsistic viewpoint, is it not? What I'm taking from your post is that /you/ are done, and in your own words, I can "conclude you have no counter argument" to what I have said.
So, as you have not even acknowledged - let alone sought to address - the point I have repeatedly made, I shall take it that you concede this point and are happy now to bow out in the full acceptance of its validity.
Thank you. Despite using 315 words where two would have been sufficient, I'll extract from your essay that we agree:
1. yes, the term GIMP could be defined as a BDSM reference, and;
2. yes, the software was named after a BDSM fetish character.
With this in mind, let me refer you back to the reason why I won't install it on my laptop, stated here:
"I use my laptop for business purposes, and I regularly connect and share my screen with senior, older, business leaders who do not work in the tech world and wouldn't know Linux from a lightbulb. You might know them as boomers or GenX.
If I had a program called Gimp on my laptop and these people didn't know what it was (which most won't), then I would expect some strong opinions to be expressed. "Keep your dirty little porn habits on your private laptop, they don't belong in a work meeting", and so on, Worst case, I could lose business because they keep their opinions to themselves, but make a private decision to not move forward because they think it's weird. Names matter."
Hence why I won't install it on my laptop. Because potential clients of mine might see it, interpret it (correctly) as being a term with BDSM connotations, and taking their business elsewhere.
Glad we could agree.
And yet it seems you have failed entirely to read my posts, and you continue to demand validation of your personhood by (re)confirmation of irrelevant facts, despite my helpful analysis of your psyche!
As I have stated before (four or so posts ago), I have never questioned either the origin of the name or the fact that ONE of the definitions of gimp relates to BDSM. You are arguing against those who long ago left this thread to move on to fresh pastures. But for your sake, I remain, as I have said, for as long as you need me. I have presented the situation clearly, and yet you continue to ignore it, once more seeking something to point at so as to avoid the ego death you so clearly fear! Your questions were long ago answered, and they remain as irrelevant now as they have been from the beginning.
I shall thus present the situation to you again: you have an opinion, and you seem unable to grasp that others have a different opinion and that yours is not the final word on all that is GIMP. But if you will somehow feel vindicated by walking away without addressing this situation, having metaphorically shouted "La la la, I can't hear you!", then you can, whensoever you choose. We can be "done", as you put it, any time you decide not to reply; if walking away while continuing to sing "la la la!" to yourself is what you need to feel like you have somehow "won" (though I would add that I don't believe there can be any "winner" here, other than yourself, through victory in the quest for understanding perspectives outside your own), then please, head off into the dark night of ignorance, carrying with you your lack of understanding while wondering why you feel so burdened by a load of which you choose to have no awareness!
So it seems you cannot let go and must be the last to post, being, it seems, as childish as I, and yet you still ignore my point. Nonetheless, I am grateful for your lack of any kind of response thereto, thus undoubtedly confirming - by your own logic - that you have nothing to present by way of counterargument.
You are free now, to leave in humility and ignorance. Go in peace, to love and serve the ego.
I have to confess to being utterly baffled as to how you are not able to see that I have already answered both of your questions: one of them once, and the other twice. I answered both directly in the very post to which you have replied, but I shall repeat the relevant text here in case you cannot for some reason move your eyes slightly upwards - "I have never questioned either the origin of the name or the fact that ONE of the definitions of gimp relates to BDSM" - and I directly answered one of the questions before you even asked it; I shall again repeat this text here due to your apparent inability to read - "it is indeed clear that the name originates from a BDSM reference, and I have never questioned that".
Perhaps you are now two of the monkeys, somehow having your eyes covered as well as your fingers in your ears. To repeat, yet again, a demand for your questions to be answered - after this post clearly setting out the essence of what you seek and how it has already been presented - would be to admit a completely baffling failure of comprehension of simple statements. Will you yet again demand what you have already been given? Will you insist that you see no answers while holding the telescope to your blind eye? Is this some kind of surrealist reference to the best known of the works of René Magritte? I will await your next post with fascination.
So. Having pointed out that you already have the clarification you keep asking for (perhaps through some toddler-like desire for continuous repetition?), perhaps you might consider why it is that you have such trouble seeing that what you are presenting is an opinion, and that the two answers so fulsomely given matter not one jot in that regard?
I usually enjoy debating with trolls because it's good practice and it sharpens my mental acuity, however what's becoming clear here is that while you most certainly are a troll, you are unfortunately not a good one.
Answer my questions please, or I'll be forced to conclude you have no counter argument and we're done.
"and sends grandmothers to prison"
Ooooh, go for the emotional reference why don't you. Thugs, criminals and racists often live just as long as "normal" people and become grandparents too. Just specifying "old person" wouldn't have quite the same effect as "grandmother", but unless you know her personally or have some life history, then there's no reason to think she's some sweet old lady spending her time feeding stray cats and knitting socks for them. In that specific instance, you might even be right, but do you actually KNOW you are right?
"In that specific instance, you might even be right, but do you actually KNOW you are right?"
Stop being such a despicable human being.
"This is Britain now. And you're suggesting that a program that is both a grossly offensive ableist insult and quite literally named after a BDSM portrayal, would be taught in primary schools?"
Oh, the power just went out, it's black out there. Did I just use an insult word? Should I have said dark instead? Or is "dark" also a racists insult, as dark and some derivatives was a popular insult, at least in the UK through the 70's and 80's. Words can have different meanings in different contacts are not always an insult, except in the minds of some people who can' think.
Are we no longer allowed to refer to the People of Mongolia as Mongols because that's an insult terms used for those with Downs Syndrome? The biggest problem is the hijacking or everyday words for use as insults and then people like you assuming the insulting use of the word is the only allowed means. Oh, what a gay day it is today!
And you're suggesting that a program that is both a grossly offensive ableist insult and quite literally named after a BDSM portrayal, would be taught in primary schools?
"a program that is ... a grossly offensive ableist insult"
Can we clarify this? Are you now saying that the program itself is a grossly offensive ableist insult?
I though it was just the name against which you were contriving to take office.
> And you're suggesting that a program ... would be taught in primary schools?
Yes.
Bishopton Primary School used it to create images then used to spruce their school Created with GIMP (not a great gallery presentation, it is clearer if you directly search their site which picture they are highlighting).
Wheelers Hill Primary School downloads page says it isn't necessary for their teaching program, but may be useful for pupils to follow their own interests.
But the (surely, to your mind, evil, EEEEVILLLLL), Cawthorne Church Of England (VC) Primary School computing curriculum in YEAR 1!
Heavens, GIMP was even a recommended program back when BECTA was in existence, in the Before Times when they were just trying to get schools to indulge in all this tech and STEM sort of stuff: Using Open Source Software in Schools. So it is probably in so many schools now that it is just part of the day to day.
And once they get out into Secondary school, why, it is rife: CEA Using ICT Desirable Features for Key Stage 3 (KS3 - that is just one year out of Primary, isn't it? Whilst their minds are still - malleable - and we can bend them to our vile usage).
(It is the weekend, I'll stop at those citations, it is getting a bit tedious having to do the homework for people like Lord Elpuss.
I've stopped reading what that one in the corner writes because it's pointless dross. I'm reading and responding to comments by other posters.
You can call me what you like; I'm content in the knowledge that I'm (a) absolutely right about where the name comes from and what it means, and (b) entitled to make my own choice based on my views. Much like my clients, which was the original point.
Way back in the day, when I used to work for the illustrious Mr Proven, I tried getting some of our graphic designers who had the keyboard shortcuts for Photoshop into their DNA to have a look at Gimp and give me their opinion. They disliked it, immensely.
There were two reasons for this. First, it couldn't do RGB to CMYK transformations at the time, and that was required for anyone who worked with print.
Second, though: the name. "It sounds like a f-ing joke by a teenager with spots" was uttered by one.
So yes, names matter. Especially for tools used by professionals.
But would they have used it if it *DID* have the features need?
"It sounds like a f-ing joke by a teenager with spots"
Well, it was named in a joking fashion and, hey, maybe the students who wrote it still had spots! You do know that calling people out on their appearance, especially a medical condition that they have no control over, is offensive. Don't you? And that dissing the product of their minds because of the way they look is also one of the basic fallacies?
"You might know them as boomers or GenX."
You keep saying "names matter". Why are you labelling people with these names?
BTW, if you think older people are incapable of flexibility in understanding I take that as a personal insult, being slightly older than those whom you choose to label "boomers".
"You keep saying "names matter". Why are you labelling people with these names?"
You can believe names matter, and also use labels when appropriate. I didn't say "Don't use names or labels".
I used the terms GenX and boomers because it adequately describes the specific calibre of clients to which I am referring; those who are more likely than not to take offense at something they don't really understand due to a combination of lack of awareness, and lack of contextual relevance in their lives.
"BTW, if you think older people are incapable of flexibility in understanding..."
Some are. Older people are generally less flexible in their thinking and approaches than younger people. And if that offends you, well... I suggest you be more flexible.
No they don't. I don't give a damn what something is called as long as it does the job.
Fine. But I can assure you that the company I worked for, which took DEI very seriously, would have had very major problems with institutional use of a piece of software named with an ableist slur. Can you see that there might have been a problem if it can been called the Noncommercial Interactive Graphic Generation and Editing Resource - or would that just be an inconsequential name too?
If you had wanted to use the software, as explained before, you are - and always have been - 100% at liberty to make the minor changes to the program to make it show any other 4-character name[1]
If it wasn't worth that minimal effort, then you aren't a potential user and your entire "argument" is a meaningless counterfactual.
It you believe it is worth some effort, then off you pop and do the renaming, put it into a project up on your favourite public source code server and then calmly, quietly, approach the project and say "hey, I have an itty bitty little script that just might be useful for some of you users, can we consider adding it in, it won't affect anything or anyone else at all" - and you may Be The Change You Want To See.
> Can you see that there might have been a problem if it can been called the Noncommercial Interactive Graphic Generation and Editing Resource - or would that just be an inconsequential name too?
Now you are just being silly - as has also already been pointed out, by multiple people, the name you object is not a universal usage, unlike your deliberately OTT example. Even the usage from the character in Pulp Fiction, as the original authors admit to doing, is a sexual reference, not an ableist one, and is clearly not considered beyond the pale by everybody.
[1] 4 characters needs a trivial amount of edting, more than that needs to be rebuilt from source.
"the company I worked for, which took DEI very seriously"
There is a difference between taking DEI seriously and assiduously seeking offence to take.
If DEI is to mean anything real then the core must be consideration and it really doesn't take much consideration to realist that GIMP in upper case is an initialism, especially when it actually is shown on the menu as GNU Image Manipulation Program.
"There is a difference between taking DEI seriously and assiduously seeking offence to take."
And if the past few years have taught us anything, it's that there are a HUGE number of people out there looking for the opportunity to take offence. I would prefer not to give my clients this opportunity, hence why this software will not be installed on any client-facing device I own.
The best way to "defuse"[1] a word is simply to keep using it in another situation, one that clearly isn't in any way attached to whatever the perceived "bad" meaning is, until that is the first thing that comes to mind.
The people who try to ban or otherwise hide a word are (deliberately or not) only letting the word keep any power to insult that it (once, may have, in some part of the world) had.
[1] sorry, there must be a better phrase for that; it isn't "reclaiming", that has other implications, but it is the same basic mechanism at work.
"The best way to "defuse"[1] a word is simply to keep using it in another situation, one that clearly isn't in any way attached to whatever the perceived "bad" meaning is, until that is the first thing that comes to mind."
You could call your program the N-word and argue that you're just defusing the bad meaning; you'd still get judged.
It's just easier and less confrontational to choose a non-controversial name in the first place, especially with busy clients who make snap judgements and then move on - often without even telling you why.
> It's just easier and less confrontational to choose a non-controversial name in the first place, especially with busy clients who make snap judgements and then move on - often without even telling you why.
If it is truly that damaging to you, yet still a useful enough program to have around that you feel the urge to complain so strongly, you are - and always have been - absolutely at liberty to make your copy no longer announce itself as "GIMP": a few minutes work with an editor on the binary will do the trick, and change the menu/shortcuts of course, if you do not feel up to rebuilding from source.
If you decide that you are going to distribute copies to your clients, all you need do to satisfy the licence is to put the editing into a little script (bash or bat or ..., depending upon your chosen platform) and supply that to them alongside the modified binary. You can even get together with like-minded souls and "start a project" - heck, so long as you go about it sensibly, you might even manage to get your little editing script added as an extra into the mainstream repo, to be used by anyone who wished to. After that, who knows - it may even become the norm to do so. Go on, Be The Change!
As you haven't claimed to have taken steps to fix "the problem" yourself - or I'm sure we'd've heard you complaining instead about the annoyance of having to do that - then it is starting to sound like this whole situation with your supposed clients is - vastly overblown.
The problem seemed to be GIMP appearing on a shared desktop. So, it's even simpler that that.
The icon is a dog or fox (not sure exactly which) holding a paintbrush, which is pretty inoffensive. If you're offended by the word 'GIMP', or think your Boomer or GenX clients would be offended (I'm a non offended early GenXer btw), then it's a simple matter to change the text description on the short cut to 'Picture Editor' or something. Hey presto, no more shocked clients.
I decided long ago to move on and use another program that I don’t have to fuck around with.
Ironically exactly what clients will also do if they see a bit of dodgy sex-fetish-named software on my laptop when I share my screen.
As well they should; I would only have myself to blame for being stupid enough to install it.
You decided long ago to "move on" and not use GIMP - so this whole discussion is totally irrelevant to you and your work, all your examples of the hardship it will cause you are simply not happening, nothing that GIMP does or does not do, is or is not named, actually affects you in any way at all.
And you've made it clear that you're not going to actually try to do anything practical to alter the situation.
One could start to wonder about precisely why are you so desperate to hang onto that oldest definition of a word and declaim about it here.
Shrug.
Arguably whether or not 'Linux' becomes 'mainstream' is entirely irrelevant to what Linux is actually all about.
It matters a great deal to MS that Windows is 'mainstream', and to Apple (to a lesser extent) that OS-X (or whatever it's called) is 'mainstream', because they have shareholders to satisfy. As for 'Linux', people use it because they want to, and the same applies to a piece of software with a silly adolescent name attached to it - 'GIMP' - but then people use it for what it does, not because of the label. Very strange.
"Could you please explain this curious leap in logic a little more fully."
Sure. Peter Mattis, one of the two creators of The GImp, wrote in a 1997 interview for the Gimp Gazette that he named it after the leather-clad gimp character from the movie Pulp Fiction.
"You could call your program the N-word and argue that you're just defusing the bad meaning; you'd still get judged".
or the G-word https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw
"It's just easier and less confrontational to choose a non-controversial name in the first place, especially with busy clients who make snap judgements and then move on - often without even telling you why".
And that reaction is with GIMP nowhere in sight. Try leaving it on view and see if it creates some client "engagement".
"Funny, when I see the word gimp, I think only of the photo-editing program, no other associations. "
That's because you know that the photo-editing program exists, neatly demonstrating your tech-privilege. Many people don't know it - or Linux for that matter - exists at all.
Also, I don't believe you.
I'm with the MacroRodent on this one - I remember many years ago coming across a more or less violent reaction to the GIMP name in some online post, and I had to go look it up to find out what was objectionable. Still, if I see the word, the software comes to mind - I didn't pay a lot of attention to the other meaning, and wouldn't be able to give you an explanation without looking it up again.
So that's two of us that you have to disbelieve.
This post has been deleted by its author
The world is miserable enough as it is and some command line silliness is one of the few things left.
UNIX commands like touch, finger and so on predate linux by decades.
In a different business many years ago I read about a Mercedes engineer being asked why they hadn’t named their new car something like petal or bunny instead of 190 E 2.1316V
His reply was a classic: “We make cars, not perfume.”
As others, have stated the GNU image Manipulation Program works and also allows for an immature snigger once in a while.
I know i shouldn’t rise but I can’t help myself.
The first MPU I owned was an RCA CDP 1802, and whilst it didn't have as good a collection as you've illustrated[1] it did provide the X and Y regs, with Set Y being SEY and ...
[1] not help by not having an assembler at all - hand-coded hex, 16 push keys and a "load" switch were all I 'ad (cue "keys? You had keys? You were lucky!" responses)
OK, but having read through all of the discussion I must admit Lord Elpuss has a point.
The issue is context, but the reaction is in my opinion pretty OTT.
I do deal with all sorts of high end people and politicians and yes, when I present somewhere my desktop is sanitised. Nothing lives on there that shouldn't be there, and that's even true for links off the desktop and even the 'last file' list of applications are clean.
However, out of 10 meetings there may be one where I'd use a Linux desktop. For the majority it's MacOS (also because of Keynote) and for vary limited occasions I used Windows but that's so rare I may actually zap the VM as it spends then more time updating than doing any actual work.
And no, GIMP would not be on my desktop. Nor would any other even remotely controversial item.
It could still be installed, though, just not visible. I haven't uninstalled Carbon Copy Cloner either since Russia invaded Ukraine, just because it calls itself CCC - it's just not something I will call up.
So yes, I agree with him that there are some sad people out there looking for reasons to be offended and some diligence is required.
Asking software to change its name because it may offend someone somewhere, however, is OTT.
Cheers.
The name has never bothered me, but it is shit name, and like it or not, choosing a better one would help to promote it and expand its reach. The point that "names matter" is an undeniable truth.
Maybe use "Photo Image Manipulation Program", or "Lightroom Image Manipulation Program". Another choice "Studio Image Manipulation Program".
CHIMP is taken, they are a spam facilitator.
Almost waiting for you to claim that he only wrote an Image Manipulation Program just so he could name it after a BDSM character! That if they were decent people they would have written a compiler instead. Was it just a memorable character in a popular film? NO! The little pervert, the only thing in his mind was that it was a BDSM character!
He literally said it.
”At the time, Pulp Fiction was the hot movie and a single word popped into my mind while we were tossing out name ideas. It only took a few more minutes to determine what the 'G' stood for.“
https://www.xach.com/gg/1997/1/profile/1/
Oops. You don’t need to apologise here, I know you’re sorry.
To the downvoter, who presumably couldn't be fagged to check:
(AC: applaud your knowledge, but next time a citation, pretty please?)
The fact that one of the meanings of gimp as 'a flat decorative trimming' is by far the least-known meaning of the word - the first three being (1) British slang for a disabled person or an insult referencing disability, (2) a BDSM submissive, typically dressed in fetish attire, and (3) American slang for somebody with a walking disability mean that the post is irrelevant to the context of the discussion.
"Best known" assumes context. Anyone concerned with upholstery or interior decoration would have that in mind.
As it happens there is another use relating to textiles, at least in my part of the world, as a verb. A gimped edge is one that has been cut zig-zag to prevent fraying and gimping scissors or shears are implements used to create them.
This post has been deleted by its author
wow! Someone else who hates the stupid names of open-source software. And what the hell is GNU? "Gnu's not Unix" is what it stands for. Great. That's really 1980s student. That clears things up nicely. So what is it again? Oh, it's the base, the foundation of Linux OSes. So it's not the same as Ubuntu or Mint, is it? And Wayland? Is that the same as Mate or Gnome? So many different stupid names. No wonder Linux for the desktop hasn't come yet. Nobody knows what the hell it's called. It maintains its reputation as a system for Nerds
> No wonder Linux for the desktop hasn't come yet ... Nobody knows what the hell it's called
"Linux". It's called "Linux". The clue is right there in your own words.
Go to a supplier and say "I would like Linux, please; I am not an expert, but I want to do X, Y and Z, can you supply me with that?". Just like getting hold of anything, they may get enthuasiastic and start spouting loads of other words, but all you have to do is politely interrupt and repeat that you are not an expert and are only interested in getting your tasks done.
This is really no different than anything else, especially if you encounter somebody who knows their subject - perhaps you have never been fortunate enough to meet such a person?
"No wonder the age of the automobile hasn't come yet" (have you tried buying a car? "Zetec"? What the hell is that)
"No wonder everybody still sews by hand" ("Feed dogs"? )
"No wonder bicycles aren't popular" ("Front Derailleur"? "Cassette sprockets"? So many different stupid names)
If everybody did, including my clients, AND pronouncing it as such clearly differentiated it from the other eh - "alternative" meanings, AND it was clear from seeing it on my desktop that it meant a different thing, then that wouldn't be a problem.
But given that none of those things are the case, the offense stands.
just remove the shortcut from your desktop and close the tool before sharing your screen with your clients!
Or, maybe this is a problem more easily solved by the developer of the software calling it something else such that those steps are not needed?
This is not something that the end user should have to do.
"Some of us see "GIMP" and immediately think of an image editing program, some of us think of an ableist insult and some of us think of something relating to BDSM."
Exactly this. And because I don't know into which camp any (prospective) client of mine falls, out of an abundance of caution it will not be installed on my laptop where said client could see it.
I have seen a couple of Youtubers do the 'I tried to switch to Linux for a week' videos. And they said the lack of Photoshop was a deal breaker because they use it to make their YT video thumbnails, like it was impossible to achieve the same thing with GIMP. WTF! Paying a month subscription to Adobe to make video thumbnails in Photoshop, That is like paying for gym membership and then only going there to use their bathrooms.
I am not a graphics professional but do use GIMP on a regular basis for both work and personal use. And a few years ago I took some time and followed a some tutorials and learned how some of the more advance features id never used before worked. So unless you are someone who uses a lot of the advance features of Photoshop then probably a lot of the people who feel they 'need' Photoshop could move away from it to GIMP or any other image editor if they put the effort in to learn how they worked.
I tried Gimp several times, but as an experienced Photoshop user found using it like eating sushi with my left foot. It does not follow the same workflow logic on many levels. Even shortcuts are different.
It could have become a much more popular alternative, if not those initial things done wrong. With the basics identical, the rest could have been made much more advanced and interesting.
Now they copied Photoshop's monochrome tool palette. Why? Grayscale is harder to distinguish visually.
Same here. I only ever used cut down free version of PhotoShop back in the days when it and similar cut down commercial programmes came with graphics cards, scanners, digital cameras or stuck to the front of magazines. But I mostly used PaintShop (free versions) and later GIMP. Looking at PhotoShop and similar Adobe gfx programs now is not only overwhelming, but they use "weird" menu layout s and workflows which, to me, are totally counter-intuitive. As per my other post on this same topic, it's down to what you already know so a similar program from a different suppliers, FOSS or commercial, will do things differently and take time to learn to use. Remember switching from WordStar to WordPerfect? SuperCalc to Lotus 1-2-3? There's never been a standard way of operating any commercial app. The closest we ever came to "standard" was IBMs CUI for GUIs, which MS seem to be deliberately moving away from from with every release or update.
> as an experienced Photoshop user found using it like eating sushi with my left foot.
As I said in TFA, and others have noted, if you're on Linux or Windows, you can install the PhotoGIMP addon which rearranges it to look more like Photoshop. I haven't tried it because, as I also said, I'm on a Mac. And anyway I can't drive PhotoShop, which I find even more baffling than the GIMP, frankly. Which is why I do not accept claims that Photoshop has a better UI.
TBH, personally, nothing native on macOS or Linux quite matches Irfanview for what I want, and for more capable editing, Paint Shop Pro was the business. But it too succumbed to feeping creaturitis after PSP 4. The last time I looked, it was a bloated mess and not worth the download.
I used to use that as my standard graphics editor, it was great until a Windows upgrade meant it didn't work any more. And not being willing to buy an updated version of PSP (partly because I'm a stingy bugger, partly because from the reviews it didn't look like the newer versions were as good as 6) switched to The GIMP.
JASC did manage to slow PSP down with their - let us say, ambitions - but that is nothing compared to what Corel have done to the poor thing! I have a collection of PSP versions going back over the years, but managed to get stuck on PSP8 (far too new!) after being handed files that seem to need it.
IrfanView is definitely always the first call (when on Windows): double-click and - tada! PSP8 - how can it take so looong to start on this PC?! Did I really have that much patience back in 2003?
More fool me, I did buy a PSP 2021 licence - but at least it was from Humble Bundle, in the $1 bundle IIRC (higher tiers being Corel Painter etc - yikes!). For a giggle, I just clicked on the 2021 shortcut, waited, waited, waaaited - and then WinDbg appeared. Hokay. IrfanView it is.
> And anyway I can't drive PhotoShop, which I find even more baffling than the GIMP, frankly. Which is why I do not accept claims that Photoshop has a better UI.
It's not designed for *you*, Liam. You're not, and never will be, a professional graphic designer.
Good UI in a professional tool is about serving its professional users, not people who, well, aren't.
I love that people here are downvoting you, an experienced Photoshop user pointing out the challenges with Gimp because they refuse to believe you're correct.
And you are, 100%, correct. Your point about shortcuts being different *matters* because people who use Photoshop everyday have memorised every single one they use and don't want to spend a long time unlearning that.
The obvious approach would be for Gimp to adopt, as far as possible, the same shortcuts. But NO, it cannot, because the kind of people who cheerlead for it would rather it's a tool that is less useful to professionals and more "their thing".
"The obvious approach would be for Gimp to adopt, as far as possible, the same shortcuts. But NO, it cannot, because the kind of people who cheerlead for it would rather it's a tool that is less useful to professionals and more "their thing"."
No, the reality of your "solution" is that if GIMP officially tries to be too much like PhotoShop, then Adobe would be firing up the lawyers in nothing flat.
You're arguing that all wordprocessors need to be a clone of MS Word. Can you image the spat if Google Docs was a clone of MS Word?
I'm "smart" lazy. If I find something is capable of producing what I want, I'll spend the time learning to use it because I can see that a week or two learning it will save more than that in time, money and results in the longer term. There are many people who don't or can't think like that.
"lack of Photoshop was a deal breaker because they use it to make their YT video thumbnails, like it was impossible to achieve the same thing with GIMP"
Sigh
Anyone can make a thumbnail image in gimp or even a much more basic IMP. Have they not learned to float-copy-scale-save as ? Actions let one easily pull multiples.
I have been a PS user since 2.1 and notice that lots of its more recent "tools" seem made for people (tools) who have never really learned basic PS techniques.
Last time I looked at Gimp its method of dealing with layers was alien and awkward plus too many destructive filters and the like.
From what I have picked up this release seems a useful progression.
Mostly, it's time investment in the learning curve. People are lazy. They forget how much time they invested in learning, eg PhotoShop, and are loath to invest more time in learning something else. Those people who refuse to look at alternatives probably have no memory of the literal years put into learning Windows and the various commercial, paid-for apps they used throughout school, college and university. And of course, the big players rely on this along with unique features and file formats to lock in those lazy people who can't be bothered to spend time learning something that will save them many times that investment over, probably, less than a year.
When Adobe started screwing its customers with subscriptions, I stopped using their software. I was very happy with my copy of Lightroom, but the subscription stuff was a total deal breaker for me.
Darktable is now my raw photo processing software and it's pretty damn good.
I had used GIMP on and off for years. Now it's my FOSS go to image editor for general graphics work.
It has all the tools that most people will ever need. Photoshop is a bloated monster, with stuff that the vast majority of people will never use.
Good to see the GIMP still moving forward.
Did you know that there's an export to GIMP plugin available for Darktable? It's fiddly to install though, if you're not a developer you'll need to get and learn a bit about Git. :-(
Conceptually it's not like Lightroom and Photoshop, where they go backwards and forwards between the two any number of times. This one does one round trip after which you have a new image in your catalogue, grouped with the original. I prefer that.
I'm surprised to see all the tetchy vitriol for linux/Gimp with the comments on this article.
For me, Gimp provided a sufficiently powerful image/graphic editor that allowed me to create banners, logos, labels and advertisements for my small business. Gimp and Inkscape were my graphic editors of choice for the 10+ years I ran the business. It came without any need of subscriptions and was available to run on linux.
My choice to move my sole desktop to linux 20 years ago was simply pragmatic: have my desktop & data at the control of the corporate interests of Microsoft/Apple, or have it owned by myself, as root. Nothing has changed in the intervening time to change my mind, especially in these days where everything is a SaaS. While admittedly philosophical, I feel it's a practical rather than a 'religious' decision.
Very similar to my journey. I've used gimp for 20 years and still have about 50% of it to fully learn. I was surprised with gimp-3 in the RC3 dressing on openSUSE Tumbleweed and had a few issues. The biggest is what all gtk+2 to gtk+3 ports suffer from and that is icon-size and icon-spacing due to the gtk+3 CSS theme model. The problem being that .margin and .padding greatly effect both and many times the apps leaves the CSS to the theme to implement. (therein lies the problem)
If you use default Adwaita or Adwaita-dark (as if you have much of a choice anymore) the icon size and spacing is roughly 150% of what it was with gtk+2. Not really an issue unless using gimp on a laptop where screen real estate is at a premium. If you use any "custom" theme -- good luck. Many themes don't set a default for icon and list .margin and .padding which can cause the size of elements to vary wildly.
In my case, I could only see about 2/3 as much of the toolbox as normal. Attempting to adjust the toolbox windows size (I don't use "Single Window Mode"), caused the toolbox window to crash. So there are still a few growing pains to work though.
LibreOffice went though fits with this where its icons would spill over into the ellipsized (hidden) icon list to the right. When its gtk+3 port first appeared you could only see about 1/2 the icons you were used to seeing in the toolbar. (recall Gtk+3 removed the toolbar widget, as well as the ruler widget) Ultimately, libre arrived at a very workable solution providing a custom set of icons with fixed size and spacing that resolved the toolbar size and spacing issues well. Gimp may have to do something similar rather than relying on some CSS theme to do it. (current gtk themes are "like a box of chocolates" in that regard)
Growing pains. It's will all get sorted. Gimp has always been one amazing tool. Gimp and then Gimp 2 had a very good web-based tutorial. Hopefully they will make sure that is updated for the new features and capabilities of gimp-3. That was an invaluable resource for learning the basics of the tool.
I just installed it on my Linux Mint 21.1 testbox using the unofficial .deb build here (Flatpak and Snap are an abomination unto Nuggan in this luddite's crusty opinion, but each to their own...)
I'm happy to inform you that there is a traditional separate menu bar, distinct from the window title bar. There is, for those who prefer it the other way, an option in the Welcome dialog box (which can be called up at any time post-installation) to merge the menu and title bars.
[Author here]
> The screenshot in the article appears to be on a Mac but if looks dangerously like there is no menu bar...
Yes, it is from a Mac. Yes, there is a menu bar, but it is at the top of the screen as is normal for macOS.
I was going to point to the Linux screenshot in my article from when GIMP 3 reached RC status:
https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/15/gimp_30_release/
... But now I note that pic is from Unity, which _also_ has a global menu bar at the top of the screen. Oops. Sorry.
Anyway, yes, it has normal menus in the normal place, as is right and proper. Apologies for not showing that. I intentionally tried to show it on a different OS this time around to illustrate its cross-platform nature but I happened to pick 2 with no in-window menus. My bad.
Liam:
As a long term creator of small applications using GTK3 and Glade I have been significantly depressed by the arrival of GTK4.
.....because the Glade team flatly refuse to move off GTK3.......
.....quite right too, in my opinion, because there was ZERO attempt to make GTK4 backwards compatible in any way at all.
So here I note that GIMP 3.0 is written in GTK3.
Is this true? Is there a new dawn for GTK3? Can I use Glade for the next ten years?
> Is this true? Is there a new dawn for GTK3? Can I use Glade for the next ten years?
This is a complex and tricky question, but it is a good one.
I think it'll take me weeks of research to answer properly. I will see if I can.
The deal seems to be this...
Gtk 2 was deprecated so long ago that the significant projects using it mostly moved. I confess I do not track individual apps but Xfce moved with some pain and over several versions, which caused theming problems for those who use themes. I don't myself and didn't notice.
MATE moved over longer, but the development process of MATE is so slow I keep worrying it's died.
LXDE was pretty much a one-man project; "PCMan" Hong looked at Gtk3, noped right out, and did a rewrite in Qt instead.
By the time the desktops had moved to Gtk 3, GNOME itself had moved to Gtk 4. V4 removes a lot of things GNOME has decided it does not like, such as menu bars. The devs are now planning Gtk 5 which will deprecate X11 altogether.
MATE has had some success keeping the entire GNOME 2 stack and its window manager and dozens of accessories alive and in maintenance. Fedora is for some inscrutable reason keeping LXDE alive, but nobody else is any more.
(I really think that MATE ought to rationalise and work with Xfce on an agreed set of common accessories. Functionally the 2 are very close.)
Cinnamon is the biggest fork following and trying to keep up with GNOME $current and Gtk4. I suspect that its goals as a traditional desktop are too divergent from GNOME and it will either alienate its users by being forced to adopt CSD, drop menus, etc. -- or it will be stranded as GNOME deliberately removes stuff Cinnamon needs.
There is now a critical mass of desktops and indeed big-name apps using Gtk 3 who don't want Gtk 4 or simply can't use it because it has removed features they need. I have not read of any plans from other projects to move to Gtk 4 -- it just removes too much stuff.
So it is possible that there will be enough people to keep maintaining Gtk 3 as a legacy fork for years to come.
GLADE, though, I suspect is dead. There's been no new release in nearly 3Y and GNOME is quite aggressively deprecating it:
https://blogs.gnome.org/christopherdavis/2020/11/19/glade-not-recommended/
There is an at least semi-official replacement, Cambalache.
https://flathub.org/apps/ar.xjuan.Cambalache
It is explicitly for Gtk 4 apps, with no title bars, no menu bars, no toolbars, etc. Suffice to say I personally uninstall any app that looks like that and install a replacement. I do not want crippled phone apps on my computers, thanks.
Summary: Gtk 3 will be around for a while. GLADE won't.
Liam:
Thanks. The Chris Davis blog "Do not use Glade" is appalling.
Even more appalling is his insistence that writing XML with a text editor is "his solution".
Glade is actually a pretty useful tool. Does it have some issues? Probably! But throwing Glade away does not sound like even close to a rational solution!!
If GTK3 is set for being "around for a while"....................would it not be possible to find the resources to keep Glade in maintenance?
"There is now a critical mass of desktops and indeed big-name apps using Gtk 3 who don't want Gtk 4 or simply can't use it because it has removed features they need. I have not read of any plans from other projects to move to Gtk 4 -- it just removes too much stuff."
So I'm guessing that LibreOffice might keep the Alt-F accelerator keys and menu bar (aka CUA) for a few years. The future article you mention would be of great interest.
Recompiling against a new major version number is expected.
Having to *finally* get around to removing your calls to those bits of the API that were marked as "deprecated" 4 years ago - yeah, ok, guess we gotta.
Looking through the API change log for Good Stuff (that we can put into our dev plan and take care to think about) we'll see a few more things that are *now* marked "deprecated" - ok, put those into the dev plan (but probably use the new stuff first, as that'll be visible to Users and justify our new release).
All of the above, fine and dandy.
But - well, that isn't *quite* the way that the GNOME people think. Have a look at the other comments here about the forced changes to the UI. And to illustrate just how "helpful"(!) GNOME devs are, have a read of their plans announced back in 2016: “Gtk 4.0 is not Gtk 4” … and that’s OK:
> Meanwhile, Gtk 4.0 will not be the final stable API of what we would call “Gtk 4”. Each 6 months, the new release (Gtk 4.2, Gtk 4.4, Gtk 4.6) will break API and ABI vs. the release that came before it. These incompatible minor versions will not be fully parallel installable
Yes, they were *planning* both API and ABI breakage with point releases, on a 6 month schedule. Doesn't seem like much of a reason to try and track point changes in your own app, you'll never get anything else done!
The name is a problem.
The fact that some people think the name isn't a problem is a problem.
Do with that information what you like, but unless it changes it's going to keep being a problem.
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to talk about this software without the name being a problem?
Looking at this thread, it's clearly a problem.
What I don't understand, is why people care so much about defending something that is so obviously bad, and so obviously an obstacle to the wider adoption of this software.
Do they want this to always be the thing that gets talked about? Because that is what will happen.
I love GIMP!!
but... I've had this piece of software refused to be packaged up in order to get it reliease into two companies. because the name is offensive - roughly in the offensive area of calling it spaz, spastic, retard, dildo, knobhead, penis
Names do matter, which leads to the fact the people in charge of this software is one or more of the following
a) don't give a fuck about the wider world and how the software is percieved
b) is oblivious to the stupid name and keeps their head in the sand
c) is childish
d) likes to troll
sotware developers generally hit all of the above, so i'm not surprised
Exactly this. And what's more, this will act as a filter on who is likely to get involved as a contributor to the project.
I'm not saying it would have taken over the world with a different name, but the name undeniably holds it back to some degree, especially in commercial and professional contexts. And it's probably holding back development to some extent as well, by deterring people who could otherwise make a useful contribution.
I don't understand being OK with that.
This post has been deleted by its author
I've tried to like Gimp so many times over the years, really I have.
I've never succeeded - the UI is so bloody minded in terms of NOT being Photoshop I just can't get on with it.
That's a real shame for ME. For anyone who has never used Photoshop, it's a Meh. Having said that, the gimp UI is tricky.
For context, the first time I used Photoshop was on an SGI O2 - version 3 or something.
Prior to that, I was using Corel PhotoPaint.
Yeah, I'm an old git.
We're talking 1995.
However, interestingly, the first release of Gimp was the just the year after.
For me, in 1995, using an SGI machine was new and using Photoshop was new.
In 1996 I was introduced to Linux for the first time - Red Hat 3.0.3.
I recall trying Gimp in that year, it was ok but I never considered it a "player" - the UI was so unintuitive for me personally.
Back then, not many people beyond Stallman gave a rats ass about open source software - it wasn't exactly in the public realm.
I didn't even know who was behind the Linux project until the late 90's.
As Photoshop made leaps and bounds in terms of functionality, UI and UX I kinda grew with it.
Never paid for it once - and never have - mostly I got it through my workplace - as was the overall plan by Adobe.
The Gimp never stood a chance against what Adobe produced, but the developers didn't care - they chugged along.
It's not for me and never will be, but should always be praised for bringing free bitmap editing - and very advanced editing - to the FOSS offering.
The scripting in Gimp is just so geeky and so powerful - a tool made by coders, for coders.
Go Gimp!
Have you had a look at the PhotoGIMP plugin, as TFA mentions?
It may make the UI Photoshop enough for you to get along with it. Even if you already get Photoshop for free, and don't really have any particular need to move across, it would be useful to know, from a Photoshop user's[1] p.o.v., how good (or bad) PhotoGIMP is.
[1] which isn't me
The last three people I’ve introduced to Linux, the conversation has gone roughly thus:
„So how do I edit images?“
„Oh yeah there’s a pretty powerful program for that, I think its pre-installed actually.“
„What’s it called?“
„Sigh… GIMP“
„What?“
Which for a software ecosystem that lives on word of mouth is pretty fucking awkward to deal with.
I don’t find Gimp that useful. It’s like blender, large learning curve and obscure working philosophy. If I edit images, I get better utility from Pinta (variation on “Paint”). One function none of them seem to do is very straightforward: I just want to turn White into Transparent. Every time this comes up, I wind up using some free web-based utility that I don’t much enjoy.
I think I dummied this out once using gimp, but it’s such a pain it just isn’t worth the effort.
Also: I don’t care for flatpak appimage whatever. If it can’t be installed as a system library, I lose interest.
I use both on a daily basis.
How much have you really tried to learn either one?
"Obscure working philosophy" is just a meaningless word salad.
Blender is vast software. It has so many tools that nobody can possibly know them all.
3D, by it's very nature, demands its own language, just like many other disciplines.
If you want simplistic and limited, then stick to Pinta (seriously?)
Image editors and 3D programs take time to learn. It's the nature of the beast.
I have tried to use GIMP any number of times, but eventually I always fell back on Photoshop CS6 (for which I ran Windows 10 in a VirtualBox and only recently managed to get working half-decenlty on WINE. But after having downloaded and installed 3.0.0 with the Photogimp patch, I am impressed to the point where I actually have been using it for things that I used to fall back on Photoshop for. Which is no mean trick.
Yes, there are issues in this point-zero-point-zero version, most noticably that saving my JPG export settings doesn't work, and that's something that even in an initial major release should not have made it trhough QA. I'm hoping that 3.1 or 3.2 will address these and other problems. That said, the UI and features are now actally usable (which in 2.1 they weren't really, IMO) and although I've got the PS hotkeys stuck in my muscle memory and GIMP will require a bit of getting used to, compared to the previous version using this one is a breeze.
At the risk of enraging everyone who stands for the GIMP - and good on you, it's worth fighting for - I was rather hoping V3 would have addressed its chronically grim user interface finally. With at least two extraordinarily good competitors from which to crib from - Adobe, for all its sins, and Affinity Designer, a truly excellent piece of software - I had thought the people behind it might have taken a bit of reflection to heart, a bit of deep soul searching, perhaps asked some users of these (very much paid for) tools, why are you paying money to use these things when you could have the GIMP for free? And the reason is, because they are so infinitely nicer to use, that we'd rather give people money to keep making them better.
Well, in the case of Affinity anyway. Adobe can go fuNO CARRIER
I think you answered your own question as far as Photoshop is concerned.
As regards Affinity (both, in fact) it appears I'd have to buy a Mac of some variety or give my computer to Microsoft in order to run it, neither of which I will do. I don't, therefore, see any point in giving their authors money to support their efforts if they don't support my OS.
Affinity designer, photo and publisher are all worth a look, on sale multiple times a year and for the moment subscription free and a reasonable upgrade charge for new versions (point releases are however included just not the upgrade from V2 to say V3)
int main(enter the void)... The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
