RSS/Atom feed Twitter
Site is read-only, email is disabled

1.3 vs 1.2 ?

This discussion is connected to the gimp-user-list.gnome.org mailing list which is provided by the GIMP developers and not related to gimpusers.com.

This is a read-only list on gimpusers.com so this discussion thread is read-only, too.

5 of 5 messages available
Toggle history

Please log in to manage your subscriptions.

1.3 vs 1.2 ? Daniel Carrera 17 Aug 20:13
  1.3 vs 1.2 ? Joao S. O. Bueno 17 Aug 22:15
  1.3 vs 1.2 ? John Culleton 18 Aug 09:40
   1.3 vs 1.2 ? david 18 Aug 17:34
1.3 vs 1.2 ? Carol Spears 18 Aug 06:19
Daniel Carrera
2003-08-17 20:13:45 UTC (over 20 years ago)

1.3 vs 1.2 ?

Hi all,

After much struggle, I am finally subscribed to the list (could someone check on mailman, I think it's acting up).

In any event, I am a (somewhat) experienced GIMP user who is currently forced to use a Solaris box with no GIMP.

This is a "pristine" system, with no glibs, no gtk+, nothing. I do have GNU tools though. I was wondering how stable 1.3 is right now. Is it good enough for daily use?

Whichevery version I install will take some work because I'll have to start building from glib upwards. So I don't want to install both if I can avoid it. If 1.3 is stable enough for daily use, I'll take it. I figure that, since that's the way GIMP is going, I might as well.

Thanks for the help!

Joao S. O. Bueno
2003-08-17 22:15:49 UTC (over 20 years ago)

1.3 vs 1.2 ?

IMHO 1.3.18 is fine enough --unless you use Paths and Bezier Curves --. This tool is not quite ready.

If you do not use them so oftenly, 1.3.18 is worth it, if not for anything else just for the "space bar temporarily changes to move tool" feature. That's a killer.

On Sunday 17 August 2003 3:13 pm, Daniel Carrera wrote:

Hi all,

After much struggle, I am finally subscribed to the list (could someone check on mailman, I think it's acting up).

In any event, I am a (somewhat) experienced GIMP user who is currently forced to use a Solaris box with no GIMP.

This is a "pristine" system, with no glibs, no gtk+, nothing. I do have GNU tools though. I was wondering how stable 1.3 is right now. Is it good enough for daily use?

Whichevery version I install will take some work because I'll have to start building from glib upwards. So I don't want to install both if I can avoid it. If 1.3 is stable enough for daily use, I'll take it. I figure that, since that's the way GIMP is going, I might as well.

Thanks for the help!

Carol Spears
2003-08-18 06:19:15 UTC (over 20 years ago)

1.3 vs 1.2 ?

Paths are merely taking an extra step for me lately. I put my points on the image, they don't "connect" the way they did in the other gimps, but you can accomplish all of that in the paths dialog. And who is to say that all of that "clicking" instant crap was worth it for what the new gimp gives you. Sort of nice to use the dialog that is so much more powerful, even if only to review all that it can do.

Also, I like that quickmask has been somewhat hidden. I tend to get sloppy with it, so i appreciate the extra time it takes me to get to it so I can review if I really want to go that route or not (there was a time that this was the only way to convert paths to selections). So better for me to dig for quickmmmask i guess.

All I need now is guash, image mosaic and a nice place to see everyones new sweet plugins.

carol

Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:

IMHO 1.3.18 is fine enough --unless you use Paths and Bezier Curves --. This tool is not quite ready.

If you do not use them so oftenly, 1.3.18 is worth it, if not for anything else just for the "space bar temporarily changes to move tool" feature. That's a killer.

On Sunday 17 August 2003 3:13 pm, Daniel Carrera wrote:

Hi all,

After much struggle, I am finally subscribed to the list (could someone check on mailman, I think it's acting up).

In any event, I am a (somewhat) experienced GIMP user who is currently forced to use a Solaris box with no GIMP.

This is a "pristine" system, with no glibs, no gtk+, nothing. I do have GNU tools though. I was wondering how stable 1.3 is right now. Is it good enough for daily use?

Whichevery version I install will take some work because I'll have to start building from glib upwards. So I don't want to install both if I can avoid it. If 1.3 is stable enough for daily use, I'll take it. I figure that, since that's the way GIMP is going, I might as well.

Thanks for the help!

John Culleton
2003-08-18 09:40:43 UTC (over 20 years ago)

1.3 vs 1.2 ?

On Sunday 17 August 2003 14:13, Daniel Carrera wrote:

Hi all,

After much struggle, I am finally subscribed to the list (could someone check on mailman, I think it's acting up).

In any event, I am a (somewhat) experienced GIMP user who is currently forced to use a Solaris box with no GIMP.

This is a "pristine" system, with no glibs, no gtk+, nothing. I do have GNU tools though. I was wondering how stable 1.3 is right now. Is it good enough for daily use?

Gimp 1.3 and Xsane don't cooperate. Gimp 1.2 and Xsane do.

fyi

John Culleton

david
2003-08-18 17:34:20 UTC (over 20 years ago)

1.3 vs 1.2 ?

I use gimp 1.3.14 on a fairly regular basis. I have not printed with or tried the scanner. However, I like the look of it. And it seems fairly stable to me.

John Culleton wrote:

On Sunday 17 August 2003 14:13, Daniel Carrera wrote:

Hi all,

After much struggle, I am finally subscribed to the list (could someone check on mailman, I think it's acting up).

In any event, I am a (somewhat) experienced GIMP user who is currently forced to use a Solaris box with no GIMP.

This is a "pristine" system, with no glibs, no gtk+, nothing. I do have GNU tools though. I was wondering how stable 1.3 is right now. Is it good enough for daily use?

Gimp 1.3 and Xsane don't cooperate. Gimp 1.2 and Xsane do.

fyi

John Culleton