Here's an interesting post that's just turned up in the GIMP Google+ stream: https://plus.google.com/u/0/11663483711 ... 5tvgNf8xhE

It's responding to a question asked on the developers mailing list about who GIMP is being targeted at, and points to GIMP's interaction architect's statement "Vision briefing -Gimp Gui": http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/Vision_briefing

So my question to you is "do you feel included by this vision?"

Personally I feel a little alienated by it.

Kevin

Quote "creating original art from images; this art ranges from freaking, underground cutting edge to hyper commercial; the creativity flows from users into the work that is being done; note the ‘from images’ part, GIMP is an Image Manipulation Program, painting from scratch is definitely secondary to that;"

Painting from scratch is definitely secondary to that? They almost excluded it completely! Gimp is an excellent art tool if you don't need your paintings to look painted. No wonder I considered 2.8's brush engine "Gimmicky", it wasn't designed for me. I'll stick to 2.6.11 until somebody adapts Gimp painter.

I agree with them, it was not designed for "painting" neither was photoshop, but the advantage to it being open source is that someone can (and rest assured some one will!) fork it and make something like GIMP Paint.
However both of you are focusing on that, read further down and you get this:

They may be saying that "painting" is secondary to the focus, but they still push for people to use gimp in unexpected ways and that it is what "painting" with Gimp is! Don't just dwell on the fact that it is NOT dedicated to painting, but instead that they even acknowledge that there are GIMP "Painters" out there and may eventually bring in more aspects of "painting". Remember that they did bring more presets, brushes, dynamics and such from GIMP Painter.

The brush dynamics in 2.8 are designed for designers not artists. Shock is the only involved party who had artists in mind and his contribution is brush tool presets. He's not part of the main Gimp team. If the Gimp developers acknowledge that there are Gimp painters, they should bear them in mind when developing their software. Technically they have a right to develop it how they wish but it seems crazy to almost exclude a group just because it's not the main purpose of their software. I don't mind taking second place but this attitude almost makes me want to give up Gimp completely.

I don't agree on that either. IT IS their software, and they know there are people out there who will fork the software. It's really a mute point if you think about it. Why focus on something when other people are going to, not could, fork the main files to make something like GIMP Paint (or Painter w/e it is). And you also have to remember that it has been 2.5 years since their last update. Why strive to add in more things all in one go that could cause, or be causing, issues with a new release?

I know it's their software and I already addressed that. With regards Gimp Painter, it's not a part of Gimp and I don't expect it to be included but there are coders out there capable of recoding it and I'm hoping somebody will. When that happens and when I no longer see people having problems with 2.8 I will upgrade. You are taking your angle because 2.8 suits your purposes - it doesn't suit mine any better than 2.6.11 does. When developing software, it is only reasonable to bear ALL of your users in mind otherwise you will alienate some of them.

I understand all your points. However every software alienates some of its users. Just like political parties, many people feel the same and group up. "If they don't make it this way than we won't use it!" That is the inherit issue with developing any sort of software.

It's more a case of "If they make it this way then there are better tools for me - bye bye Gimp!" And have you seen Photoshop's brush engine? It's designed with artists in mind.

Another point. Because Gimp is image manipulation software, artists take second place yet web designers don't. I wouldn't have thought Gimp was the most useful tool for web design.

So what? IF you feel there better tools, than why even use GIMP? I think that sticking with their initial vision of a "GNU Image Manipulation Program" and designing it as such, is their goal. If they had set out to make a painter it probably wouldn't have struck as big either. And just like my I told my ex when she didn't like my thought pattern, "Don't like it, theirs the door." Plain and simple.
PS I'm done with this topic, I'm not trying to step on toes, I just agree with the dev's and don't think people should try to push them in any way other than what they want.

I'm on benefits because I have psychological issues. I cannot afford Photoshop otherwise I would probably switch. "Don't like it there's the door" is a S**T attitude! There are other people to consider. I will not reply to any more of your posts Zward so please don't reply to mine!

I can't afford it either so why bring in the friggen money issues?!? Had nothing to do with anything about it, jeez, but thats fine with me.

Sorry guys had to lock the topic, before it gets out of hand. Please use the PM system or email.