Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 14 (2007) — Help & Support

Toggle history

Please log in to manage your subscriptions.
mailman.17723.1166850666.16...		07 Oct 20:18
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43	George Farris	02 Jan 18:12
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43	Steve Thompson	02 Jan 23:09
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43	Ken Tanaka	03 Jan 19:17
mailman.1.1167768003.17388....		07 Oct 20:18
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 2	George Farris	02 Jan 22:22
mailman.1.1168372803.29073....		07 Oct 20:18
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 13	Jose Rodriguez	09 Jan 21:23
mailman.1.1168459203.5797.g...		07 Oct 20:18
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 14	Jose Rodriguez	10 Jan 23:02
Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 14	Sven Neumann	11 Jan 08:18

Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43

On Fri, 2006-22-12 at 21:11 -0800, > I really do think we need to find a better, less offensive name for GIMP,

and the sooner the better, so that we can put energy into supporting it, and doing whatever we can to extend it's use instead of periodically having this disagreement.
Yes *points at best post in thread*

OK, look here is the real fact, bar none. Only the person who utters a phrase, let me say that again "THE PERSON WHO UTTERS A PHRASE" in a derogatory manor is the real issue here. Words mean nothing until hey are said in a derogatory manor.

GIMP means nothing to anyone until the person saying it gives it meaning. We mean it to be a graphics program. If you went to a handicapped person and showed them the GIMP and explained what it was they would think nothing of it, unless they were used to using the word in a derogatory manor themselves, shouting it out at other people. These people are not worth changing the name for to put it bluntly.

Cheers

Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 2

GIMP means nothing to anyone until the person saying it gives it meaning. We mean it to be a graphics program. If you went to a handicapped person and showed them the GIMP and explained what it was they would think nothing of it, unless they were used to using the word in a derogatory manor themselves, shouting it out at other people. These people are not worth changing the name for to put it bluntly.

Just to clear this up, after reading my own message. I meant the people that use GIMP in a derogatory manor are not worth changing it for.

Cheers

Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43

About the whole naming issue.

I feel that, for me at least, I would like for the Gimp to have a different name. This is not because I think that the current name might be taken offensively, but rather because I find many cute names convey a lack of seriousness.

I remember recently attending a local club for photography enthusiasts. The question came up of what image editing software various people used. Photoshop was a frequent answer, as one would anticipate, as were a number of other Windows based tools. I made mention of the Gimp, and people looked at me rather peculiarly. I went on to mention that it was a very powerful application and completely free, but beyond their bewilderment, not even a bit of interest was expressed.

Now, not to cheer for the other guys, but had my image editor of choice been Pixel, I might have gotten an entirely different reaction because of the name. Even Krita, which connotes nothing but sounds kinda trendy would probably elicited a different kind of reaction. But Gimp? I might as well have been promoting a tool called PimpDaddy.

A cute name just doesn't spell for me the kind of future user penetration I would like for the Gimp to have. Names do have value - do you think an image editor called 'Snuggles' would gain much traction with serious photo professionals? I don't, because just like 'the Gimp', it conveys a tool that doesn't take itself seriously.

$0.02,

Steve

--

On 1/2/07, George Farris wrote:

On Fri, 2006-22-12 at 21:11 -0800, > I really do think we need to find a better, less offensive name for GIMP,
and the sooner the better, so that we can put energy into supporting it, and doing whatever we can to extend it's use instead of periodically
having
this disagreement.
Yes *points at best post in thread*
OK, look here is the real fact, bar none. Only the person who utters a phrase, let me say that again "THE PERSON WHO UTTERS A PHRASE" in a derogatory manor is the real issue here. Words mean nothing until hey are said in a derogatory manor.
GIMP means nothing to anyone until the person saying it gives it meaning. We mean it to be a graphics program. If you went to a handicapped person and showed them the GIMP and explained what it was they would think nothing of it, unless they were used to using the word in a derogatory manor themselves, shouting it out at other people. These people are not worth changing the name for to put it bluntly.
Cheers

Gimp-user Digest, Vol 51, Issue 43

Steve Thompson wrote:

About the whole naming issue.

I remember recently attending a local club for photography enthusiasts. The question came up of what image editing software various people used. Photoshop was a frequent answer, as one would anticipate, as were a number of other Windows based tools. I made mention of the Gimp, and people looked at me rather peculiarly. I went on to mention that it was a very powerful application and completely free, but beyond their bewilderment, not even a bit of interest was expressed.

Maybe a 15 minute GIMP demo of something that is not easy to do in Photoshop is in order. Most clubs are happy to have offers to show new techniques.

A cute name just doesn't spell for me the kind of future user penetration I would like for the Gimp to have. Names do have value - do you think an image editor called 'Snuggles' would gain much traction with serious photo professionals? I don't, because just like 'the Gimp', it conveys a tool that doesn't take itself seriously.

I have no trouble taking 'GIMP' seriously--the website is good at showing it is a major program, with documentation and tutorials. If you can introduce it well enough that someone other than you mentions at a photo club meeting that they had fun trying out the GIMP, the name is no longer a barrier. But are you sure the name is a barrier? it may be that people like what they are used to and don't like learning curves, no matter what they are called (it probably took quite a bit of time for them to become comfortable with their first image editing program).

The odd name could help people remember it.

"'Smuckers,' with a name like that it's gotta be good"

-Ken

Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 13

J Rodz

-----Original Message----- From: gimp-user-request@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:00:03
To:gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: Gimp-user Digest, Vol 52, Issue 13

Send Gimp-user mailing list submissions to gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to gimp-user-request@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU

You can reach the person managing the list at gimp-user-owner@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Gimp-user digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Re: delete a file (Sven Neumann) 2. Re: GIMP's equivalent of adjustment Layer in PS? (Jakub Steiner) 3. Re: GIMP's equivalent of adjustment Layer in PS? (Shawn Willden) 4. Re: GIMP's equivalent of adjustment Layer in PS? (Steven Woody) 5. Re: GIMP's equivalent of adjustment Layer in PS? (lists)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1 Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:45:49 +0100 From: Sven Neumann
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] delete a file To: gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain

Hi,

On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 20:57 -0500, Helen wrote:

I love the GIMP, I admire the GIMP community immensely, and am reluctant to find a fault -- but I do believe that would be a worthwhile improvement.

I think I made it clear that such a change would have to happen in GTK+, since that's where the code for the file-chooser widget lives. Please stop this pointless discussion here. If you really want this feature, ask the GTK+ developers for it. But I am pretty sure that there is already a bug report for it.

Sven

------------------------------

Message: 2 Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:16:41 +0100 From: Jakub Steiner
Subject: Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP's equivalent of adjustment Layer in PS? To: Steven Woody
Cc: gimp-user@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain

On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 14:10 +0800, Steven Woody wrote:

in Photoshop, there is a tool 'adjustment layer', what's the equivalent in Gimp? thanks.

Hi.
There isn't an interface to have non-destructive adjustment layers as found in Photoshop.

You can work around this in many situations however. If you want to boost saturation without losing the original image, duplicate the layer, saturate the topmost and then use the opacity slider to control the amount. If you want to bring up the shadows, do a similar process, setting the layer mode to addition, etc. You have to be more specific in what you are trying to achieve.

cheers