I have not used GIMP extensively, but I love Photoshop. Even though 95% of the
time I don't use CMYK seperations or any of the "output" functions. I create
mostly for the web. But from the multi-level undos (finally ;-) to how the
layers work I just like the general feel and UI of Photoshop. I like most Adobe
products.
I think Adobe is a pretty good company and they do a lot of good for their
customers and others. I have no problem paying for software from them.
Michael
Ray Olszewski wrote:
> At 09:07 PM 6/8/99 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote [in part]:
>
> > I think so. (But why would you want to run Photoshop when you
> >have Gimp?)
>
> Is this (implied) opinion based on actual experience with both products? I
> ask because I've not used Gimp, but one of the most important uses of my
> Win95 machine is Photoshop (including use of a TWAIN scanner).
>
> Have you actually found Gimp as functional as Photoshop with respect to
> scanning, equalizing, applying a range of special filters, doing
> threshholds, doing CMYK separations, doing duo- and tri-tones, and
> controlling printer attributes such as line frequency, angle, and dot shape?
>
> Advice I've gotten locally suggests Gimp is far inferior to Photoshop (this
> from a local Webmaster who uses Linux for ***everything*** except Photoshop
> work, and who has the same scanner as I do). Before I go through the work of
> getting Gimp installed and running (and abandoning considerable expereince
> with Photoshop), I'd like to know that someone who has used both products
> really does find Gimp satisfactory for high-quality photo scanning and
> manipulation.
>
> ------------------------------------"Never tell me the odds!"---
> Ray Olszewski -- Han Solo
> 762 Garland Drive
> Palo Alto, CA 94303-3603
> 650.328.4219 voice [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
