On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 12:18:35PM -0400, Joey Marshall wrote:
> On 6/24/06, Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It doesn't have to be *versus*, both can be useful for different things.
> no, I'm not arguing one better than the other...
that actually could be funny though.
actually i have seen so many web sites and opinions tauting photoshops
superiority that i think it is about time for gimp to make such a web
it could be a two sided tutorial. photoshop on the left, gimp on the
right. show how easy it is to do things with photoshop and how
difficult it is to do with gimp.
maybe we could even work out a deal with amazon where we get some of the
proceeds for selling photoshop.
we could actually make money keeping them alive.
> >> There are two main differences that stood out to me.
> >> The first is the amount of affects and tools available.
hmm, maybe someone should ask Sven Neumann and/or Mitch Natterer to
refresh our memories about the differences between what is considered a
tool and what is considered a plug-in.
> >> The second is the way the filters are applied. I like how photoshop
> >> does it better. Instead of applying to the image itself... it acts
> >> more like a filter. You apply it to the layer.
> >There is a request for these kinds of live layer filters in bugzilla.
> >(Photoshop has normal filters too.)
> >> Now for my suggestion on the website. I think it would be very helpful
> >> for have a section that would be like a cross between an FAQ and a
> >> help desk.
> >It might be appropriate to use the Wiki for that kind of information but
> >it depends what you have in mind and the developers want.
> I'm a web developer. And could quickly create a website to do it. :)
> I just wouldn't want to if noone would be interested in something like it.
do not mention the acronym php.
> >> Basically, people could post their questions on how to get a desired
> >> effect on an image.
> >People use the lists for this kind of thing, also places like Deviant Art
> >and the GUG
> There are two problems with the these three methods that I can see.
> The number 1 reason is that a lot of people won't use them. A lot of
> people don't even know what mailing lists are. Or won't want to
> register on a forum just to ask a question.
> The next big reason I don't think those methods are good enough, is
> that not everyone will find them... I sure didn't with google.
"good enough" is a some what relative phrase.
i think it would be more fun and interesting to write tutorials about
how gimp sucks compared to photoshop and sell copies of photoshop there.
if google doesn't work to find things, whose fault is it?
if you search for "gimp" with googles moderately safe search filter, you
will find both of those things.
> Also, the same things get asked over and over. The idea behind an FAQ
> is to answer those questions asked over and over again once and for
> all... so to speak.
if we did something completely interesting like selling photoshop and
write tutorials demonstrating photoshops superiority; we would not have
to figure out how to get google or those other sites to work the way you
> I think it should also be located (or linked to) on the official gimp
> website. People will find it a lot faster that way.
the site needs a redesign. i make all web sites look like gtk or gimp
widgets lately. i don't know if that is such a good thing for the main
page at www.gimp.org. the apparatus for remaking the web site is almost
there. the site now needs an html and css redesign.
i am actually frightened to ask drc to do this since i kicked him in
> You may see things differently than that, and that's ok. We all are
> entitled to our own opinions :)
this is where gimp gets stuck.
Gimp-user mailing list