I certainly believe that GIMP is an excellent tool. However, i must say that many users (like myself) don't need such an advanced program. Xubuntu is about speed, it is meant to be fast, light-weight distribution, and therefore, GIMP should definitely be replaced with something just a little bit simpler, and user-friendlier. But there is another problem - there is not a replacement that would be completely satisfying. Pinta's features wouldn't be frightening, and it is probably the best choice. On the other hand, considering that Pinta depends on Mono libraries, improvement from GIMP isn't that great. Still, I do believe that Pinta is GIMP's perfect replacement, and I hope that it will be included in 11.10.
2011/8/1 Ryan Winner <email@example.com>
If it ain't broke don't fix it. Gimp has been standard for years and
works perfectly. Leave it.
On 7/30/11, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Send xubuntu-devel mailing list submissions to
> ¬* ¬* ¬* email@example.com
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> ¬* ¬* ¬* https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ¬* ¬* ¬* firstname.lastname@example.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ¬* ¬* ¬* email@example.com
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of xubuntu-devel digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> ¬* ¬*1. Re: Replacing GIMP (Kristian Rink)
> ¬* ¬*2. Re: Replacing GIMP (Jarno Suni)
> ¬* ¬*3. Re: Panels in Oneiric Ocelot (Eero Tamminen)
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:20:46 +0200
> From: Kristian Rink <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Replacing GIMP
> Message-ID: <20110729142046.14bc2260@n428>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Am Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:40:19 +0300
> schrieb Jari Rahkonen <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>> "average" user. My personal choice would be shotwell, which is
>> admittedly a bulkier piece of software than gthumb, but still less
>> than half of gimp's 14 megs (in Natty). It has all the features you
>> just described and more, but in my experience surpasses gthumb in
>> refinement and ease of use.
> I'd go with that.
My preferences for gthumb are mainly rooted in my
> "old-fashioned" style of working with images in (file system) folders
> but I have to admit that some of the features provided by shotwell are
> _really_ neat, especially the ability to "vote" for pictures (5 .. 0
> "stars") and filter images based upon this "voting", even though I
> remember having seen this elsewhere before - Apple? Adding to that,
> shotwell seems a more easy-to-use choice for sorting large collections
> of images without having much manual work to do.
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 18:40:09 +0300
> From: Jarno Suni <email@example.com>
> To: Xubuntu Development Discussion <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: Re: Replacing GIMP
> ¬* ¬* ¬* <CAOqj8L0BGnQAZAu7Lhju-+Uj21JfkzO=9ftxo2njAiX7+Acp_A@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Kristian Rink <email@example.com> wrote:
>> reading all along this discussion the last couple of days, I see things
>> becoming funny in some ways. Comparing apples and pears, anyone?
>> Am Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:21:21 +0300
>> schrieb Jarno Suni <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>>> > Can GNU Paint crop images? I am not that sure...
>>> Did you mean gpaint? Natty suggests only xpaint when you type gpaint
>>> in terminal (if gpaint is not installed). Gpaint can add text, but I
>>> did not find undo function.
>>> Does anybody miss layers?
>> Yes. I _do_. I have been working with Gimp ever since 0.9.something,
>> and at the very least, for what I do, layers is an absolutely
>> essential feature. But this is irrelevant IMHO. Shouldn't the question
>> be, considering limited amount of space on a live or installation
>> medium, which application that comes bundled with the default package
>> provides _most_ value to _most_ users? At the moment, I see a
>> discussion which ends up merrily mixing various different kinds of
>> applications, including
> mtPaint has layers and it is very light.
>> 1) advanced image retouching / photo processing applications like Gimp
>> or pinta
>> 2) image management and browsing applications that provide for
>> more or less extensive simple editing features, such as gthumb, geeqie,
>> fotoxx, f-spot, shotwell and the like,
>> 3) bare-bone image viewers, such as ristretto, gpicview, eog, ...
>> 4) batch image processing applications such as phatch,
>> imagemagick+scripting, ... .
>> 5) applications not limited to yet focussed on doing pixel based
>> painting, such as gpaint, mtpaint, ... .
>> Maybe except for (1), I am completely convinced for each of these
>> categories there are 1000+ more applications that easily could be
>> listed here. So, what provides benefit to an end user using a Live
>> medium or an easy-on installer without thinking twice?
>> - Apps in category (1): Maybe not. Gimp still seems considered
>> ?user-unfriendly by quite some people (whyever), and overally, the
>> ?complexity and feature set of such applications IMHO is something
>> ?just needed by advanced users.
> I would add rawstudio, but it is not made for painting at all.
> Rawstudio does not modify your original photo files. Instead, it saves
> your setting for each image in hidden .rawstudio folder in image's
> folder. Processed images are saved in a folder of your choice. Batch
> processing is supported (for scaling at least).
>> - Apps in category (2): Definitely yes. Pretty much everyone owns a
>> ?digital camera or at least a camera equipped cell phone of some sort
>> ?these days it seems, and the use case of sorting a whole load of
>> ?images, browsing them, eventually scaling down one or two to quickly
>> ?allow for sending them via e-mail or uploading them to flickr,
>> ?facebook, ... seems the use case most likely. Should this ask for an
>> ?application that comes with "sharing" support - "upload to flickr"?
> Some of these have a database of images that may help organizing
> images; you have to import images to make your application aware of
> them. You can use e.g flickr website to upload your photos, so it is
> not necessary to use a local application for that. But there is some
> advantage in sharing function, if you use tagging for your photos in
> your image management software and want to use the same tags in e.g
> flickr. IIRC there are tools specially made for exporting images to
> flickr and others.
>> - Apps in category (3): Well, not sure, maybe not. Only benefit these
>> ?apps provide compared to these in category (2) _might_ be a lower
>> ?memory footprint, at the expense of eventually having to work with
>> ?two different applications for "viewing" and "rudimentarily
>> ?manipulating / sharing" images.
> Well, if you have qeegie, you won't miss one of these. It can edit
> orientation of photos, but otherwise it is just a viewer that can show
> everything you want about your images fast. You don't import images by
> qeegie or others in this category.
>> - Apps in category (4): No, not on the default medium. These are expert
>> ?applications used by, well, advanced or expert users who have a clear
>> ?idea of what they want to do and are looking for an application to do
>> - Apps in category (5): Not sure, this should basically depend on how
>> ?many people actually digitally draw or paint using their
>> ?GNULinux/Xubuntu box. I _guess_ the amount of people doing so at
>> ?least is way smaller than the amount of people messing with digital
>> ?camera stills once in a while.
> I don't use Gimp or such often after I found Rawstudio, but I
> occasionally use other editors to make things I can not do by
> Rawstudio, like adding text.
>> Well, disclaimer: This is strictly my $0.02 and it is a view on the
>> world done by someone who is pretty much "photo-centric". However, from
>> this point of view, I don't think the question is whether to "replace"
>> the Gimp. The question is whether an advanced application like Gimp is
>> required or well-placed in a default installation (given it's just and
>> exactly an "apt-get install gimp gimp-plugin-registry" away. The
>> question should be what kind of "imaging requirements" Joe Average
>> might have and how to best meet them.
>> Personally, I'd vote for inclusion of gthumb as a modestly-weight
>> "category (2) app" as main image management application in the default
>> installation which provides image viewing and most of the basic
>> functions (scaling, cropping in terms of "cutting away" parts of the
>> photo, removing red eyes, uploading to flickr, facebook,
>> photobucket, ...) in an easily accessible tool.
>> Oh well, so much for that.
>> Kristian Rink * email@example.com * http://node.zimmer428.net
>> "Time moves in one direction, memory in another."
>> (William Gibson)
>> xubuntu-devel mailing list
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 02:00:46 +0300
> From: Eero Tamminen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: Panels in Oneiric Ocelot
> Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Content-Type: Text/Plain; ¬*charset="iso-8859-1"
> On tiistai 26 hein?kuu 2011, Kristian Rink wrote:
>> Am Mon, 25 Jul 2011 15:33:35 -0600
>> schrieb Charlie Kravetz <email@example.com>:
>> > We are looking for constructive criticism to make Oneiric's panels
>> > easier to use. Please give us your opinions and changes.
>> Well, no global or meaningful hint, just my $0.02 on that: As most of
>> the time I use Xubuntu on machines with screens not all too large
>> (netbook, notebook), my usual "first steps of configuration always are
>> like that:
>> * Delete the lower panel as it just occupies space and gets into my way
>> ¬* without providing additional benefit.
>> * Lock the upper panel full-size to the screen, make it use the system
>> ¬* style, height at 24 pixel, switch off any transparency or composite
>> ¬* effects.
> IMHO most users couldn't care less about panel transparency and composite
> still makes things less stable, not just slower.
>> * In the upper panel, add applets in this order:
>> ¬* * start menu (icon only)
>> ¬* * places menu (icon only)
>> ¬* * task bar
>> ¬* * desktop pager (two rows, I usually run with 6 .. 8 virtual desktops)
>> ¬* * notification area / system tray
>> ¬* * clock
>> ¬* * session menu
> I've seen several non-technical people to like a CPU usage indicator.
> Especially on machines that have less RAM or are otherwise slower, it
> shows that machine is actually doing something as response to user
> actions, like starting Firefox...
>> I am aware that this is a highly individual kind of setup, but I've
>> been using a desktop style like that in my day-to-day productive use
>> ever since early XFCE 4.x versions and so far it is the setup I found
>> to be most useful and most unobtrusive - it's there, looks somewhat
>> good, and just works.
> ¬* ¬* ¬* - Eero
> xubuntu-devel mailing list
> End of xubuntu-devel Digest, Vol 70, Issue 22
Ryan The Winner <firstname.lastname@example.org>
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel mailing list