Hey fellow GIMPers, I'm about to try adding a LINUX OS to my WIN 8.1 laptop. I've decided to go with Mint/Cinnamon (seems like the most idiot-proof). Any tips/tricks to help me along with the process? I'm going with a dual boot (haven't looked into the UFEI issues yet), and just wanted to know if there are any pitfalls I may run into. I'm not a coder or even a script-kiddie, so please be kind in the comments, although it seems all of you are more than helpful, and not insufferable clods. Thanks in advance.

I am a luke-warm fan of LM these days, I think they have lost the plot to a certain extent, LM debian as a rolling release became a partial rolling release, then a disaster.
The regular based-on-buntu versions, are solid and have the same annoyances
eg Go for a long-term-support and maybe miss-out on the latest and greatest or re-install every 6 months.

This is not a winge, go for it. It is as good a starter distro as any.

advice:
subscribe to the forum http://forums.linuxmint.com/
look in the beginners section there is a wealth of info there
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewforum.php?f=90
learn how to use synaptic (application installer) rather than the horrible dumbed down software center.

I hope that this link will be usefull for you

1. i don't like dual boot for my main computer:

i usually work with many windows opened,
i have programs that contain data and settings, so it is difficult and annoying to hold 2 different programs that does the same thing, on 2 different OSs, with their respective 2 data-sets.

Take for example GIMP:
imagine you have gimp on the windows "side";
you then install your plugins, some of them specific to windows;
you have settings that make you work efficient;
you might use the latest gimp 2.9, because it's very easy to get and install.

now you install gimp on Mint;
since you're a newbie, you might get stuck with the default version 2.6
it's a bit different. you have different features
different settings.
different plugins;
different patterns, brush order, etc.

oh, did you by mistake save the images on a boot-side that is not accessible to the other side?
then you have to stop working and reboot again, just to copy the file to the shared folder...

etc.

if you just want to experiment with linux, you can have it on a bootable flash drive,
or install a virtual machine (just make sure you have a lot of RAM memory, e.g. 8GB+)

ah,
if you DO install linux,
it's much easier to compile a new version of GIMP;

(that is, if your hard drive is big enough to contain all development dependencies)

i compiled a recent version on my linux computer, and i'm satisfied with the results.

Come on guys don't put a newcommer off with compiling gimp - last time I did it, it added nearly 1 GB in devel files to my nice lean installation.

According to 'distrowatch' Mint 16 will install Gimp 2.8.6 If you want 2.8.10 then a 'buntu ppa has to be used. Hence my reference to synaptic.
More important, get LM installed first and use 2.8.6 as a starter.

UEFI. There is a whole section devoted to installation and booting on the LM forum.

1) any recent of release of the end-user distros (Fedora, Ubuntu...) has a Gimp 2.8
2) compiling/installing you own Gimp isn't too hard when you are a seasoned Linux user, but I wouldn't recommend that to a newcomer. Not having to compile your own is what made the distros popular...

This said your remark about the lifespan of distros and the obsolescence of the included software is true. After a couple of years you start missing out on newer stuff and it's time for an upgrade. The "long term service releases" are more meant for servers or for packaged workstations used professionally.

I've been running Mint since January of 2013 and after several months of using it gave up on windows and removed it from my system, Mint just seems so much better. I did reinstall Vista into a virtual machine eventually but that was for a one of project.
When I first installed Mint, this was on a Vista machine using a dual boot, I let the live CD do all the work and everything worked out fine. The grub boot loaded appeared after install and I had the choice to choose either win or Mint. Since then I've learnt to set up my home folder on a separate partition so that when I install the latest version of Mint I don't need to back up my existing home folder, files and settings that are in there, as it will not be removed during the install - must admit I've yet to try this as I'm waiting for the release of Mint 17 before I try out this process, but the home folder is already on its own partition and in theory all should be fine.

Don't know anything about the Debian version as I don't use it.

I run both Mate and Cinnamon versions on separate hard drives. I prefer the Mate addition as it seems the more hard hat and work boots version, Cinnamon, to me, appears to fancy itself as the magician version with it fancy top hat and silk scarves and lots of flourishes, but each to their own they're both good, solid operating systems.

I personally have never come across any problems with moving files from one hard drive to the next. I don't need to reboot to gain access of a second or third hard drive, I simply mount, this makes it accessible, the hard drive I wish to move files from. This can be done from within the home folder of the Mint system. From memory windows doesn't allow this operation, but that's windows.

To get the latest version of Gimp on Mint, 2.8.10, It either needs to be compiled, lots of extra files to be added which needs to be done via synaptic, or a ppa added. A lot of this stuff made no sense to me when I first started using Mint, but I like to learn and I did and that's what Mint is good for - setting off on a journey of discovery, and one where the os won't try to stop you going where you want to.

As others have said the Mint forum is well worth checking out, lots of friendly, helpful people there. And for Gimp/Mint related issues this is always a good place to ask.

I'd like to weight in with support for Fedora 20 MATE

Like MINT, you can install Fedora 20 with the MATE Desktop. It should make your transition from Windows much easier than installing a Linux version with Gnome3.

Fedora 20 now has a nice new version of the installer (anaconda), which is really easy to use. This ain't your Grand Pappy's Fedora. It comes with GIMP 2.8.10 out of the box. Fedora is also slowing down a bit on their release schedule. You can get two years out of a Fedora install these days.

Here is basic guide (with pics) for Dual booting Fedora 18 & Win8. It's the same procedure for Fedora 20. They mention some issues with anaconda in this article but that was F18 and the problems have long been fixed. These are screenshots from F19's anaconda installer that are a little more current.

As previously suggested , if you have enough power in that laptop, installing Linux in a Virtual Box might be a good way to go.

http://www.wikihow.com/Install-Fedora-17-in-Virtualbox

You don't need "power" to run a VirtualBox or any kind of virtual machine. 99.99% of the code executed in the virtual box is executed by the "bare metal", and the CPU performance of applications in the virtual machine strictly identical to those running on a native system. Most servers in Known Space are actually running in virtual machines... and I daily run a benemoth of an IDE in a Windows VM machine... where it run slightly faster than in the native Windows systems of my colleagues on the very same hardware(*). What you need is disk space for the machine images. If you use the VirtualBox software, the "Open Source Edition" that you'll likely find on your distribution repository is not as good as the "commercial" but free version (which isn't open source, found at VirtualBox.org).

(*) possibly because it optimizes its I/Os, focused on a 40GB disk instead of spread over a 320GB one, and also because the virtual box being used for that sole purpose, I could jettison all the impedimenta (firewall, anti-virus, many services...)

You certainly do. When I say "power", I'm referring to CPU/RAM/Architecture, as well as I/O channels & external storage.

Many of us need a robust platform because we end up running hardware intensive applications, across multiple VMs, simultaneously. This might not be the case for Kellyman, but I have no idea what kind of hardware he has or which applications he intends to run.

The more Virtual Machines you have running simultaneously on a box, the more "power" that box will require. Performance will vary, depending on the applications you are simultaneously executing.

Gnutux, we are not talking about servers here, but about an end-user PC.

Well, I was just trying to clarify my response and rebut the assertion that VMs don't require "power".

I will concede that you're probably right in this matter. There is a good chance that Kellyman's Windows 8 laptop is very capable of running a single instance of Linux in a VM. He shouldn't notice much of a performance hit, as along as he's just using the VM to switch from one OS to the other. I've ran across a few display issues when running Linux inside a VM, as opposed to stand alone, but nothing that couldn't be easily resolved.

Running Linux in a VM is certainly safer than attempting to install multi-boot on a Windows 8 laptop that you're never done it on. You can't mess up your Windows 8 installation by installing Linux to VirtualBox.