Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GIMP 2.10 To Be Fully Ported To GEGL Core

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • powerhouse
    replied
    Should I get up my hopes?

    I mentioned in another thread that I have been following Gimp for many years (since 2004, to be exact). I've tried it several times, but 8-bit color depth made it useless to me (except for simple web graphics use).

    I've been spending a lot of money in professional photo editing applications and tools, and am going to spend more to make them run on my new PC. I would much prefer to donate that money to the Linux community, or to Gimp specifically, if only Gimp would deliver the goods (or even only the essential ones).

    Now Gimp seems to get 16 bit color depth. Perhaps even adjustment layers. And perhaps layer masks with intelligent selection tools (take a peep at Nik's U-mask). Is there a chance Gimp will also support native Photoshop plugins and filters, inside a Linux environment? Perhaps I get carried away.

    Does anyone see it happening that one day I can set up a complete workflow for photo editing and output on a Linux machine, including color management with hardware-based color profiling of the screen and prints, RAW conversion with adjustable highlight and shadow recovery as well as distortion, color aberration etc. correction, reversible editing and image storage, adjustment layers, keystone correction, artistic filters (tonal contrast, etc.), various selective sharpening tools, DAM (digital asset management) with tagging and keywords, camera, printer and paper profiles, conversion to different file formats, etc.?

    Am I fantasizing?

    Will Gimp, together with some other tools, ever get there?

    I find that Linux gives me everything I'm looking for (and more), except for a photo editing solution. Is there anyone out there who feels the same?

    Leave a comment:


  • powerhouse
    replied
    Why AMD for Gimp? Please explain

    Any reason why AMD should be preferred?

    Here an old announcement from the Nvidia developer site: "NVIDIA has chaired the industry working group that defines the OpenCL standard since its inception and shipped the world?s first conformant GPU implementation of OpenCL for both Windows and Linux in June 2009."

    I've been using Nvidia cards for many years and I'm very happy with their closed-source drivers - in my systems they simply work(ed). I particularly like the long-term support for old GPUs, so I can continue using my ancient graphics adapters with the latest Linux distro.

    I'm going to buy a PC and graphics card this week. Is there any good reason I should lean towards AMD/ATI who have had a less than optimal track record - at first no Linux support, now yes, even open source support, but not for all GPUs, old stuff is not being supported, who knows what the next quirk will be?

    I'm open to suggestions.

    Leave a comment:


  • d.a.a.
    replied
    Originally posted by Ibidem View Post
    You forgot to mention this: AMD's Paying For Some Open-Source OpenCL Love

    This should make for some noticeably better performance, if people have the right graphics cards.
    GPUs usually provide a significant speedup, but having a multi-core CPU is enough to take advantage of OpenCL.

    Leave a comment:


  • AnonymousCoward
    replied
    Originally posted by Ibidem View Post
    But 6 months? I doubt that.
    http://www.chromecode.com/2011/02/wh...eased-yet.html says: "The second reason is that we develop features directly on the main branch. [...] There is almost always a feature on the main branch that is incomplete. [...] The solution to all our problems is the same. We need to begin developing big features on feature branches and merge them to the main branch when they are ready." So they identified their problems, and if they manage to change their development style accordingly they hopefully can put out releases much faster, and a 2.10 six months after 2.8 doesn't seem that far-fetched.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ibidem
    replied
    Originally posted by Azpegath View Post
    I think a complete port to GEGL should deserve a release of its own.. A lot of companies would at least consider it important and a big enough feature to give it its own version I think. Perhaps they should consider a 2.10 in 6 months then?
    http://wiki.gimp.org/index.php/Roadmap
    Looks like it will be GEGL, layer masks on layer groups, GSoC projects, and internal work.
    This is the basis for 2.9/2.10, FWIW. But 6 months? I doubt that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fenrin
    replied
    Originally posted by JanC View Post
    ...
    ok, thanks for the explanation.

    Leave a comment:


  • JanC
    replied
    Originally posted by Fenrin View Post
    So is the plan that GEGL replaces Cairo in the future or has it a different purpose than the Cairo library
    Cairo is a library for drawing on your screen or another output device (PDF, printer, etc.).

    GEGL is a framework for manipulating (raster) images?including support for non-destructive editing, very large images that don't even fit in memory, various bit depths (even mixing them), efficient implementation of filters & effects, etc.

    So totally different things...

    Leave a comment:


  • Fenrin
    replied
    So is the plan that GEGL replaces Cairo in the future or has it a different purpose than the Cairo library

    Leave a comment:


  • Azpegath
    replied
    I think a complete port to GEGL should deserve a release of its own.. A lot of companies would at least consider it important and a big enough feature to give it its own version I think. Perhaps they should consider a 2.10 in 6 months then?

    Leave a comment:


  • Ibidem
    replied
    You forgot to mention something....

    You forgot to mention this: AMD's Paying For Some Open-Source OpenCL Love

    This should make for some noticeably better performance, if people have the right graphics cards.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X