> As it was stated before, making applications act "similar" doesn't > turn out in "familiarity", but in a percepction of incompleteness. The > most our applications looks like others, the most former users of > other applications will spot what's missing, perceiving differences as > limitations. > When I switched from GIMP after almost 15 years of Photoshop the first > reaction was the same. I wanted GIMP to behave like photoshop, because > I considered Photoshop's the right way of doing things. > Now I'm glad it didn't work that way, because it forced me to > understand that I was using a different program.
My experience in that matter is that my workflow is _unchanged_ wheather I use GIMP or Ps. I use curves in the same places, quick mask and mask in general too, brush, stamp, healing… the list goes on. I love the idea of “display filters” that I use when working on bitmaps with GIMP but I fail to see more such grounbreaking features like that. The paradigm of raster graphics editing stays pretty much the same. I think that most of the work towards the shortcut scheme switcher is already done. What is missing it seems to be the final step—small but completing the whole thing as “being convenient”. I like to think about this list as a place of meeting both developers and users. I'm a graphic designer with not enough time to do crucial coding, but enough time to try to improve GIMP with a simple suggestion: shortcut “theme” switcher and within it Ps “compatible” shortcuts as an option, how about that? I don't think it's much in the sense of coding, but it is much if you're trying to convince somebody to use GIMP. Why? Maybe in time the'll contribute their own ideas as well—as long as they'd be willing to use GIMP in their everyday work. I think that similar shortcuts will help to promote GIMP to them. I _DO_ appreciate the developers work, admire it in fact because it's selfless, but still I think both devs and designers should work together. I'm telling what I'd like to have, trying to reason it the best I can. If I fail to convince the others to my ideas then, well… no problem at all :)—that's the right of democracy, which I respect. > In the future I'd love to see even more differences. > Who knows, maybe a node UI instead of layers, for instance ;-) > Moving in that direction, imho, would stop this endless and pointless > flamewar about GIMP vs. Photoshop, and people who moves to GIMP would > be doing an informed choice instead of seeking a free-of-charge > Photoshop. I'd love to have them too! But _real_ differences, not the ones made only for differing's sake :). Node editing could be promising. Especially if used nodes could be grouped as larger blocks for further use. That would work somewhat like “recoded actions” but much more powerful. But that's the subject for yet another thread… ;). Best regards! thebodzio PS. Sorry if somebody felt my unleashing all this a bit trolly ;) but one have to try to improve what one likes, even if the process is about to be painful.
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer