[phaemon]

> GIMP. Select the selection tool(why???)

Mainly because 99% of learning Gimp is learning how to use selections properly. Gimp is for image manipulation, not drawing buttons.

If that's the kind of stuff you're doing, use Inkscape. Do the Tutorials under the Help menu. They're really excellent and it sounds like exactly what you're looking for.

[scott_karana]

Does Inkscape have any raster modification capabilities? Not all "buttons" are composed solely of vectors.

[phaemon]

Yes, a few, but why not do those in something else...say, Gimp?

I can't think of a decent looking button (even for very loose definitions of "decent") that couldn't have been done with vectors. Can you give me a good example?

[scott_karana]

My point is that Gimp was pointed as a Photoshop replacement, but then excused for poor vector support.

Then, Inkscape was proposed for its vector support, but it neglects raster support.

Why use two solutions when Photoshop offers both capabilities?

[aryastark]

You remind me of the people that use Excel to do desktop publishing, or mocking up GUI screens.

God bless your special breed.

[scott_karana]

Pardon? I'm advocating Photoshop over Inkscape because, to my knowledge, only one of them excels at mixing raster and vector capabilities.

If I want a high-resolution vector button with the modified picture of a face on it, I know which program I'm choosing.

Was I that unclear?

> Gimp is for image manipulation, not drawing buttons.

> (implied) Inkscape is for drawing buttons, not image manipulation

Photoshop is used for both image manipulation and for drawing vector buttons, in its modern incarnations. That was my point.

[phaemon]

I see. So Adobe Illustrator is useless?

[scott_karana]

No, Illustrator is fantastic for its usage cases. (As I'm sure Inkscape might be)

We were talking about Photoshop replacements. Despite the name, it's very much a hybrid raster/vector tool now, unlike how the GIMP was described above.