In GIMP g+ channel inform that one of its developers ask for donations to be able to work full time improving the upscaled and downscaled images method (advanced interpolation methods in the GEGL library).
GIMP also calls for developers interested in helping rewrite the filters to GEGL. For that should contact in IRC channels.

https://plus.google.com/+gimp/posts/ZMoswB62KB5
http://www.freedomsponsors.org/core/iss ... arp-images

And a very good article in Libre Graphics World:
http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entr ... rowdfunded

I wish I could dedicate time for development of GIMP.

I am howerver, creating video guides(screencasts and presentations.)

The post says "His choice of a crowdfunding platform is quite unusual", but this is simply because the platform is so new. Nicolas's funding has already broken the record for number of participants (and I think the total amount pledged?) and I hope the platform can benefit from the publicity this generates. If you browse around the site, you can see that users have created other GIMP bounties for the taking (vector layers, canvas rotation).

I also hope GIMP will soon officially embrace paid development, because the current situation is bad for community building - people want to participate financially ("Shut up and take my money!") and cannot understand why they are blocked. Here is one traumatizing reason from ancient history, though: search for mark shuttleworth gimp bounty (can't post links yet, sorry).

GIMP could of course use something like Selfstarter (look it up, open source by Lockitron) on their own website and not use a 3rd party platform.

It should be clarified that this crowdfunding effort is a personal initiative of a GIMP/GEGL contributor; it is not a case of the GIMP project asking for donations to fund the developer. That is not to say that Mr Robidoux's initiative is unworthy of our support nor that the GIMP project is opposed to such developer-funding efforts, quite the contrary. It is just that the GIMP project currently follows a policy of not paying developers for working on code, and uses its own donations to cover maintenance of the GIMP websites, travel expenses to conferences and meetings, and the occasional hardware purchase for development purposes (e.g., buying a graphics tablet for a developer so that it can be properly supported).

Thanks, edited.


Maybe they could take the example of Blender. I do not see that it's bad to get money to have developers working full time. They need to make money to live in this real world.
I would not like GIMP will fork between those who want a project as the current and those who want something more professional.

I'm not opposed to crowdfunding but there are pros and cons. Cash is a great motivator, which can be a plus. Problems can arise when the cash becomes more important than the project. You can end up with an incomplete, poorly designed final product or something that is not exactly what the fund providers were expecting.

That's when things go bad because now users/funders feel they are owed something they didn't get. Whereas when no funds are involved, no one can complain that they are somehow owed something they didn't get.

Krita has had very good results from paid development and I'm sure they can share their experiences and process details with the GIMP team, if the situation changes. The teams are on good terms and for example Peter Sikking has done UX work for both Krita and GIMP. Btw., Krita just set up a foundation in the Netherlands, check it out on their website.