GIMP Roadmap

I remember asking Gimp devs why there is no non-destructive editing: i.e. applying effects in chain to a layer, without modifying its pixels, like you would process textures in 3d rendering pipeline (Photoshop and other commercial editors had it for ages), and back then Gimp devs replied that pipelining is a useless features, which will only confuse users (it was around 2009-2010). So years have passed, and now the amazing has happened:
https://wiki.gimp.org/wiki/Roadmap#GIMP_3.2
>Filter/Adjustment layers Needs complete GEGL port first, API for stacking GEGL ops on a layer will be available in 2.10
>Layer effects bevel/emboss, drop shadow etc., needs complete GEGL port first

TLDR: old Gimp had completely broken internal architecture "designed" by undergrad students, who had no experience working with graphics. That architecture was really clunky, rigid and unscalable, leading to impossibility of introducing even the most basic features, like pipelining. Now they try to bolt on GEGL - a former commercial architecture, used in motion picture, it was opensourced after its owner went bankrupt.

So their answer, about the feature being useless, was more of a damage control sour grapes propaganda. Like in USSR they always lied to you, that you don't need a car or even a good food, like sausages.

So yes, opensource retards cant even design a shader pipeline themselves, otherwise they would be working in a large company, earning a ton of money. If you ever wrote a shader for your video game, you're smarter than 95% of Gimp crowd.

Interesting.
Gimp certainly feels like that.

It is sad that this developer ethic is prevalent in the Free software community.

Another thing: what annoys me is the deference of blame in Free software projects. Anyone who has used Pidgin (the instant messaging software) will know how pathetic its developers are. Every bug or feature request that mattered was dismissed as 'oh, that's just a design of libpurple' or 'oh, would need to change libpurple to support that'. Thus Pidgin is where it is today, not remotely modern. Its website still boasts that it supports AIM, jesus.

I don't know man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEGL#History_of_GEGL

>>3
Fun fact: Gimp still has no animation support, while even Krita already got it. So no way you can make animated gifs or a youtube channel intro. Even most toy pixelart editors have animation feature, but Gimp believes it is too much. BTW, recently Gimp registry went down. And that was the only place you could get a few animation related plugins, like morphing, which for some reason are excluded from default package, despite morphing being one of the most popular features, due to comic effect of say morphing some obnoxious politician into a monkey.

>>5
People try to hack in animation support themselves, but broken plugin API doesn't really allow much freedom:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GIMP/comments/5cwffm/plugin_a_simple_timeline_based_on_layers_to_help/

>>5
Filter -> Optimize for Animation(gif) -> Export -> Replace per Layer

>>7
Are you retarded?

>>8
Also, "filters -> animation -> spinning globe" crashes Gimp.

>>5

Fun fact: Gimp still has no animation support,

Wrong. Every layer group can be a separate GIF frame. You can even specify timing on a per-frame basis by putting something like (100ms) for 100 milliseconds in the layer or group name at the end. You can either have them all have the same speed, or do what I just said and have different timings for each one.

Granted, GIMP's animation features aren't anywhere near as good as Photoshop's, because in Photoshop you can have multiple frames with a single layer and then manipulate it in the animation workspace, but with GIMP it's more primitive and you need to duplicate and move layers, so it's really only good for making short GIF animations rather than really long and fully-featured animations. But you can still technically make GIF animations with it.

The fact that you don't know how to read documentation or learn how to use it doesn't mean the features don't exist. Sure, they're not great -- but they do exist.

>>5

So no way you can make animated gifs

This is false, my gif-obsessed mother only uses gimp to make her gifs.

>>10
No timeline, onion skins or animation playback. End of story. You can't even have one layer (i.e. background) shared between several frames. And if you modify one of the objects, you have to manually propagate changes to each of its copies.

The absence of animation support follows from the absence of non-destructive editing. Also, gifs are limited to 256 colors, while for video editing you want true color. BTW, Gimp doesn't allow exporting layers as separate images, so each time you want to export your animation, you have to save each layer manually.

You have to be early Disney level artist to make something remotely good looking with Gimp.

>>12

No timeline

your layers/groups are the timeline

animation playback

Filters -> Animation -> Playback

Also, gifs are limited to 256 colors

a 256 color indexed palette is not the same as a flat 8-bit one. You can have any combination of 256 colors. Also, there are plugins for being able to export as APNG, among other things. But keep in mind that the whole point of a GIF as opposed to a video is that it's supposed to be small and short. It's not a fully-fledged video editing program like Lightworks or something. But if you export a bunch of PNG frames in a directory, you can use a bash one-liner for using ffmpeg or something to convert it to a webm or something.

for video editing you want true color

A GIF is not the same as a video like an H264.

Gimp doesn't allow exporting layers as separate images, so each time you want to export your animation, you have to save each layer manually.

You can export the entire project as an animation. Just export and then add .gif to the end and then you'll be prompted with the GIF export screen. Or, like I said, there is a plugin for APNG (Animated PNG) as well, though not many people use that. There are other addons and scripts you can make too. But again, this is sort of like complaining that a hammer is not good for eating a salad with. You need the right tool for the right job. GIMP is good for certain things, but it's not intended to be used for everything. I use GIMP, but I don't use it for every single thing that requires image or video editing.

You have to be early Disney level artist to make something remotely good looking with Gimp.

Not really. But yeah, Krita is better for drawing. I use Krita and GIMP because there are some things that are better in one program compared to the other. I used to use Photoshop and it's better in some ways, but not all. Not all software is the same.

>>13
GIF was a thing at the time of compuserve. Now everyone at https://kohlchan.net/int/ share mp4s.

>>14
oh shit you post on kc /int/ too?
what about ylilauta?

>>5 Since you don't believe anyone, I animated this thread on GIMP:
https://0x0.st/sGri.gif
>>14 Video Compression my man:
https://0x0.st/sGro.mp4

bydlita thread