Re: [Gimp-developer] Funding for GIMP or CinePaint
Daniel Egger escreveu: On Feb 25, 2004, at 10:35 am, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: Image manipulation is one of the key application areas that needs to be addressed for open source tools to become the mainstream desktop environment. I'm currently funding a number of different open source projects, and am considering funding work on the GIMP or CinePaint. I can only speak for myself but being somewhat impressed by the GNOME bounty system, I'd like to recommend you the following to boot: - Identify problem areas (talk to users, let usability experts speak up, etc.) Very well them, I think that regardless Mr. Shuttlework would choose to act on these lines, this is exactly the "talk to users and usability experts" stage. :-) So, let´s try to make an objective time line of the GIMP, like had been outlined before, and try and guess what could be sped up if there were apropriate funding? The GIMP 2.0 is getting out AnytimeNow(tm). After that, GIMP 2.2 with a lot of enhancements, but no changes on the bit depths (but according to what I've heard from the GEGL guys, with a little GEGL already in) should follow in 6 months or so. An them, in about one year, which IMHO is optimistic seeing the pace for the 2.0 release, there would be a GIMP 3.0 whith full support to other bit depths and color spaces, due to full integration with GEGL. That is about it that has been said around here, ain't it? Now what to say? these timelines apply if most of us go working on our spare-times, with a few exceptions. Maybe with funding, more people could go fulltime/partime into the project, and say, speed up GEGL development and integration. I think this is what we could think about and tell Mr. Shuttleworth. Also, he asked reasons to support GIMP rather than, or concurrently with, CinePaint. IMHO the GIMP interface has evolved more and better than CinePaint's. But I use that program too litle to know about all of it's features - and their's todo list posted here seemed ratehr impressive. Also, the inner code of the GIMP is expected to be cleaner and easier to extend than CinePaint's. But I had not actually picked into their code. - Split up tasks in handleable subtasks - Set up a website specifying all taks and the possible money to get - Wait for people to show up and implement the tasks - Pay the money Maybe mr. Shuttleworth would rather leave these steps to us - or to the Gimp Foundation(s). The bounty is to be paid once the feature or solution has been successfully integrated into the main GIMP CVS repository and acknowledged by the maintainer(s). This IMO works much better than any global funding where misc. people benefit while others probably doing the more interesting jobs do not. Servus, Daniel Regards, JS -><- ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Funding for GIMP or CinePaint
Hi, "Joao S. O. Bueno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The GIMP 2.0 is getting out AnytimeNow(tm). After that, GIMP 2.2 with > a lot of enhancements, but no changes on the bit depths (but according > to what I've heard from the GEGL guys, with a little GEGL already in) > should follow in 6 months or so. Yes, that's basically the short-term plan. > An them, in about one year, which IMHO is optimistic seeing the pace > for the 2.0 release, there would be a GIMP 3.0 whith full support to > other bit depths and color spaces, due to full integration with GEGL. I would rather expect more 2.x releases than another major version jump with another 3 year development cycle. Now that the code is quite well organized, we should be able to carefully add new features without giving up stability. This will allow us to a more frequent stable releases. Our users will benefit from this since they get access to new features shortly after they are introduced. However, more detailed plans for the time after the 2.2 are supposed to be made at this years GIMP developers conference. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Funding for GIMP or CinePaint (fwd)
I just realized, that the Cc: of the original mail was sent with the wrong From: line. So here it is again for the list members... Mark Shuttleworth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Image manipulation is one of the key application areas that needs to be > addressed for open source tools to become the mainstream desktop > environment. I'm currently funding a number of different open source > projects, and am considering funding work on the GIMP or CinePaint. Nice to hear that. > I've had some discussions with Robin Rowe on the CinePaint front, and > would also like to hear from the GIMP community, to help me figure out > what the most effective strategy will be. > > My goals are: > > - to help open source tools reach the point where they compete with > Adobe Photoshop for professional use. I understand that the GIMP is a > fantastic tool already, as is CinePaint, and that both have some > features which are better than any commercial tool, but it's also clear > that they both need considerable further work before they become a "no > brainer" choice for any professional We definitely work towards a mature and professional image manipulation program, but we don't want to permanently have to catch up with Photoshop. We want to develop our own ideas and limiting our scope to the set of features of Photoshop won't bring new ideas into image manipulation. So our goal is to develop an image manipulation program that rocks, is ready for professional use, and also have lots of fun while developing it. > - to create capacity in these tools for high end digital photography, > cinematography and printing We definitely want to be able to provide this. > - to integrate with the best and latest in open source desktop > environments, to comply with user interface guidelines and to perform > well in usability and discoverability While we are careful before adopting each and every idea of some guidelines, we indeed want to enhance the usability. We are also very eager to enhance the interoperability. The two major desktop environments - Gnome and KDE - collaborate to enhance their interoperability. When they agree on a common standard (usually published at freedesktop.org) we usually adopt this standard. Examples are Drag'n'Drop (XDND), the WMspec guidelines, desktop entries and thumbnail management. > - there is no goal number 4 You forgot "have fun with it" :-) > I've asked Robin if he will allow me to publish our correspondence to > date, on which I'd very much like your feedback and commentary. > Regardless of whether we do that, I'd like to hear from the GIMP > developers and community. You probably are aware that there are - uhm - differences between the CinePaint and GIMP developers. I'll address some of the key points below. > - Is the GIMP a good platform to build on to try to achieve these goals? Very much so. If you look at the latest 2.0 prereleases you'll notice that there has been a great improvement on the GIMPs User-Interface. We got some enthusiastic feedback on the new user interface (compared to GIMP 1.2), and the code quality has improved a lot. It is more modularized, which e.g. enables to run the GIMP without a user interface and makes it easier to extend the GIMP with new functionality. GIMP 1.2 was a mess compared to the current codebase. > - What functionality would need to be added to the GIMP to challenge > Photoshop? I can tell you the current plans after the 2.0 release. Stuff like this has been mentioned to us as a blocker of a PS->GIMP migration and we believe that these things will help people to decide in favor of the GIMP. - Right now GIMP internally is basically restricted to 8-bit RGBA, which is a pretty severe limitation. We want to introduce an abstraction layer for the actual image data. This enables us to use different colorspaces and different number formats for the imagedata (16-bit, float etc.). We plan to integrate with GEGL, which is currently under heavy development. As first integration step it is planned to have a GIMP release that will not yet add new colorspaces, but will be based on GEGL. - We need to introduce a color calibration framework. Here we need to agree on a standard with other application developers. - another issue we want to address is the layer stack. Right now it is limited to a linear stack of layers, where each layer might have a layer mask. We want to extend this to a layer tree (not necessarily visible to the user). This will enable us to have layer groups with a common mask. - we want to introduce layer effects, i.e. layers that have an filter-like effect on the layers below (e.g. a blur layer). If we manage to do this properly this will be a killer feature. - As mentioned above we want to further improve the interoperability. Badly needed for example is a code to cut'n'paste image data between different applications. > - How would the GIMP team use funding that was made available to
Re: [Gimp-developer] Funding for GIMP or CinePaint
On Feb 25, 2004, at 10:35 am, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: Image manipulation is one of the key application areas that needs to be addressed for open source tools to become the mainstream desktop environment. I'm currently funding a number of different open source projects, and am considering funding work on the GIMP or CinePaint. I can only speak for myself but being somewhat impressed by the GNOME bounty system, I'd like to recommend you the following to boot: - Identify problem areas (talk to users, let usability experts speak up, etc.) - Split up tasks in handleable subtasks - Set up a website specifying all taks and the possible money to get - Wait for people to show up and implement the tasks - Pay the money The bounty is to be paid once the feature or solution has been successfully integrated into the main GIMP CVS repository and acknowledged by the maintainer(s). This IMO works much better than any global funding where misc. people benefit while others probably doing the more interesting jobs do not. Servus, Daniel PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Gimp-developer] Funding for GIMP or CinePaint
I am no developer but for years we used gimp to edit high resolution large imagery sets. Orthorectified aerial photography for GIS and engineering applications. We ultimately moved to Photoshop even against my wishes since I thought the majority of our issues could be solved if we persistently addressed them. Management on the other hand saw it in another light. NOTE: I am not debating the merits of GIMP vs PS. Im pointing out real problems within the bounds of the question that has been asked. Quoting Mark Shuttleworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > - Is the GIMP a good platform to build on to try to achieve these goals? > - What functionality would need to be added to the GIMP to challenge > Photoshop? First thing is what I think is memory management. GIMP can not deal with large rasters. Im talking 500MB and up. It even has issues with smaller ones. Anyone that disagrees with this obviously has not seriously tried to edit these types of files for hours. Yes, we have machines with the required ram, cpu, disk, swap, etc. Versus Photoshop... There is no comparison. PS 7.x works and works well. GIMP just doesnt. And yes I tried cinepaint and FilmGIMP. No go. And no I have not tried compiling gimp for x86 64bit but then whats the point? PS works on 32bit and lets face it 90+% of the machines gimp is going to run on are 32bit. I have GIMP 1.2.1 compiled and running on a Tru64 4.0f ES40 with 4 667cpus and 16GB of ram in it. On it the memory issues are even worse. I never bothered to try and get it working better since its not a practical solution anyhow. Image redraw and processing. The image redraw with large data sets is slow. I have seen gimp 2.0 in action and it appears to be significantly faster than the 1.2-1.3 series. It is still long from being comparable to Photoshop 7.x. Filters are just not as fast for the most part. Some are actually faster but a good example is the plain old sharpening mask with preview and including applying and redraw. It take about 5 times longer in GIMP on the same machine and file. TIFF tags such as world coordinates, projection systems and such. GIMP should not trash this information. I could have swore at one time GIMP did not but it seems to do it again or now does it. Photoshop has always destroyed this information. I suppose this could very well require just a recompile of gimp with newer tiff libs or perhaps the geotiff libs(if that can be done). I personally like the GIMP a lot. I use it with everything else in life but at work on large imagery it just isnt going to happen. It kicks butt for web graphics, home photo manip and art. It has a ways to go though to be on par with Photoshop 7.x and it makes sense. PS has been around for 4-5 times longer then GIMP has it not? They have had a lot more time to develope it and for the time frame in which gimp has developed it level of maturity is really quite amazing. Ill put on my flame retardant gear just in case... - This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Funding for GIMP or CinePaint
Image manipulation is one of the key application areas that needs to be addressed for open source tools to become the mainstream desktop environment. I'm currently funding a number of different open source projects, and am considering funding work on the GIMP or CinePaint. I've had some discussions with Robin Rowe on the CinePaint front, and would also like to hear from the GIMP community, to help me figure out what the most effective strategy will be. My goals are: - to help open source tools reach the point where they compete with Adobe Photoshop for professional use. I understand that the GIMP is a fantastic tool already, as is CinePaint, and that both have some features which are better than any commercial tool, but it's also clear that they both need considerable further work before they become a "no brainer" choice for any professional - to create capacity in these tools for high end digital photography, cinematography and printing - to integrate with the best and latest in open source desktop environments, to comply with user interface guidelines and to perform well in usability and discoverability - there is no goal number 4 I've asked Robin if he will allow me to publish our correspondence to date, on which I'd very much like your feedback and commentary. Regardless of whether we do that, I'd like to hear from the GIMP developers and community. - Is the GIMP a good platform to build on to try to achieve these goals? - What functionality would need to be added to the GIMP to challenge Photoshop? - How would the GIMP team use funding that was made available to them to achieve these goals? - Why would the GIMP be a better project to support than CinePaint (for the purpose of attaining these specific goals)? - What impact could funding have in terms of specific deliverables and timeframes? If this isn't the best forum for this message please accept my apologies and point me to the right place. Thanks for the work you have done in producing an exceptional tool. I'm no image editing expert but I can appreciate the polish and effort required to create and maintain a project such as the GIMP. Thanks, Mark -- Try Debian GNU/Linux. Software freedom for the bold, at www.debian.org http://www.markshuttleworth.com/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
