Not saying GIMP’s UI is great (I only use it occasionally), but efficient UI isn’t necessarily an “intuitive” UI. I.E. an intuitive UI may not be efficient for a professional that takes the time to learn it and works with the UI ~40 hours/week.
Intuitively finding basics everybody starting out needs in the ui takes a backseat to the pro who is using all the shortcuts and custom workspace layouts going to adapt to the changes anyway. Especially as basically no one uses gimp professionally all day and the people who would use it are not using gimp cause it’s not intuitive.
I can’t wait for freecad to stop being just an poweful near peer and actually become an usable near peer.
Yeah, I have much more time in FreeCAD than PhotoShop. I don’t think it’s either intuitive or efficient, lol. But, I was surprised that I was able to both create model to both 3D printing, and create paths for my plywood router. In my experience KiCAD is near peer, because Altium also sucks.
True, but I prefer intuition over efficiency when I pick something up for the first time, second time, and third time, until I eventually have a good enough understanding to begin worrying about efficiency.
There are use cases for Libre office writer, just as there are for vim, even though they are both capable of producing text documents. One is arguably more intuitive while one is arguably more efficient, but if I didn’t know anything about word processing/text editing and had to pick between the two, I would pick writer.
Same goes for anything else, and it’s also why a decent number of text editors/software support emacs/vim bindings - so that you can use the software intuitively, and then once you understand it, you can become more efficient by using modal bindings. Same goes for GIMP versus other software. The thing about other softwares in the same genre is that they can be learned relatively easily and can also be used efficiently. GIMP I find harder to learn, even if it is efficient later.
For anyone who is new who has to make a choice as well - very few people would pick vim to start out with.
Furthermore, in this instance, I do have a decent amount of photo editing experience and have used multiple softwares to do it, but even after that, the problem I have with GIMP is that a lot of this knowledge does not transfer to GIMP like it does for other software. If I learn photoshop, I can get away with using affinity, krita, corel draw, clip studio, and other software - but not nearly as easily GIMP.
I would also argue that efficiency is equally dependent upon the software as it is the task. The workflow for digital painting, animation, and photo editing are all quite different, and no one UX/UI is the most efficient at all of them. This is why most of these softwares have modular interfaces, which is good, but I simply find the modular interface of GIMP harder to use or understand versus the rest.
Yeah, for all I know, GIMP is as intuitive and efficient as Photoshop. I.e. they’re both as un-intuitive to me, and I’m not efficient in either (I probably haven’t use PS in a decade). But, I guess being intuitive is a good “hook” in regards to market share. I am a software engineer, and do prefer (neo)vim, but I guess I started out on NetBeans. I kind of see that as a level-up in regards to efficiency; not sure if that exists in other industries.
That’s a good question, I’m not too sure since I work in IT/Software as well and am currently using kakoune. I think a lot of efficiency upgrades in other industries are typically a cost gap instead of an understanding gap. For example, a carpenter could start out with a tool like a hand saw, and then later upgrade to a band saw, but they need to pay a lot more for and find space for the more efficient tool. This can kind of exist in software as well, but the funny thing is that a lot of the time these days I find the FOSS stuff better overall, which I think sets this phenomenon apart from other industries and whatnot.
Not saying GIMP’s UI is great (I only use it occasionally), but efficient UI isn’t necessarily an “intuitive” UI. I.E. an intuitive UI may not be efficient for a professional that takes the time to learn it and works with the UI ~40 hours/week.
Intuitively finding basics everybody starting out needs in the ui takes a backseat to the pro who is using all the shortcuts and custom workspace layouts going to adapt to the changes anyway. Especially as basically no one uses gimp professionally all day and the people who would use it are not using gimp cause it’s not intuitive.
I can’t wait for freecad to stop being just an poweful near peer and actually become an usable near peer.
Yeah, I have much more time in FreeCAD than PhotoShop. I don’t think it’s either intuitive or efficient, lol. But, I was surprised that I was able to both create model to both 3D printing, and create paths for my plywood router. In my experience KiCAD is near peer, because Altium also sucks.
True, but I prefer intuition over efficiency when I pick something up for the first time, second time, and third time, until I eventually have a good enough understanding to begin worrying about efficiency.
There are use cases for Libre office writer, just as there are for vim, even though they are both capable of producing text documents. One is arguably more intuitive while one is arguably more efficient, but if I didn’t know anything about word processing/text editing and had to pick between the two, I would pick writer.
Same goes for anything else, and it’s also why a decent number of text editors/software support emacs/vim bindings - so that you can use the software intuitively, and then once you understand it, you can become more efficient by using modal bindings. Same goes for GIMP versus other software. The thing about other softwares in the same genre is that they can be learned relatively easily and can also be used efficiently. GIMP I find harder to learn, even if it is efficient later.
For anyone who is new who has to make a choice as well - very few people would pick vim to start out with.
Furthermore, in this instance, I do have a decent amount of photo editing experience and have used multiple softwares to do it, but even after that, the problem I have with GIMP is that a lot of this knowledge does not transfer to GIMP like it does for other software. If I learn photoshop, I can get away with using affinity, krita, corel draw, clip studio, and other software - but not nearly as easily GIMP.
I would also argue that efficiency is equally dependent upon the software as it is the task. The workflow for digital painting, animation, and photo editing are all quite different, and no one UX/UI is the most efficient at all of them. This is why most of these softwares have modular interfaces, which is good, but I simply find the modular interface of GIMP harder to use or understand versus the rest.
Yeah, for all I know, GIMP is as intuitive and efficient as Photoshop. I.e. they’re both as un-intuitive to me, and I’m not efficient in either (I probably haven’t use PS in a decade). But, I guess being intuitive is a good “hook” in regards to market share. I am a software engineer, and do prefer (neo)vim, but I guess I started out on NetBeans. I kind of see that as a level-up in regards to efficiency; not sure if that exists in other industries.
That’s a good question, I’m not too sure since I work in IT/Software as well and am currently using kakoune. I think a lot of efficiency upgrades in other industries are typically a cost gap instead of an understanding gap. For example, a carpenter could start out with a tool like a hand saw, and then later upgrade to a band saw, but they need to pay a lot more for and find space for the more efficient tool. This can kind of exist in software as well, but the funny thing is that a lot of the time these days I find the FOSS stuff better overall, which I think sets this phenomenon apart from other industries and whatnot.