Re: [Gimp-user] Bit-depth Processing
On 10/2/07, gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Monday 01 October 2007 16:09:23 jim feldman wrote: Patrick Shanahan wrote: * Greg [EMAIL PROTECTED] [10-01-07 13:29] In any event, from what you've told me, GIMP may not be the right tool for me at this time. I want to retain all my bits. So until GIMP natively supports 12-bits or higher, I'm gonna have to stick to Photoshop for now. Then you need to abandon the jpeg format as it is lossey (google for it) and you need to shoot RAW. True for all DSLR's (I think), but some better PS's also can produce TIFF's which uses a lossless compression (actually being pedantic) as sort of pseudo raw format. For me at least, the big reasons for PS CS over gimp are the following: - The plugins. For the pro/semi pro shooter, there are just way too many very cool plugins for PS. Everything from Noise-Ninja to lens distortion corrections to some very interesting portrait tools to virtual view camera adjustments (more than just perspective correction). - Integration with the color spiders and CMS - 8/24 vs 16/48 - This is at least on the horizon for GIMP In GIMP's defense, many (if not the vast majority) of digital photographers will have no need of these features. Even if by some magic they were available, few would use them because of the cost or complexity. It's a good tool. I use it a great deal myself, and I wouldn't hesitate to use it to teach an into to digital darkroom course. The exception would be, for students who were on a professional photographer track. jim I think this approach is a sound one because using gimp students can, given a computer and internet access, get to know about digital processes without committing themselves to the expense of purchasing PS. They can find out whether they feel able to assimilate and use digital imaging processes because so many of the techniques remain the same. However there is no way, given the gimnps currently available tools set one I would feel confident recomending it to students for professional processing or for working collaboratively with other professionals in the industry. I wish this were not the case but until Gimp development reaches reaches the right level that is the way it is. There is also the problem of non-destructive editing which cannot be advanced until Gimp has the tools to handles raw files rather than relying upon conversions using an external tool set.. On Tuesday 02 October 2007 09:38:38 carol irvin wrote: i used to teach in a college setting but in a non-art dept. the commercial art courses were all given with adobe products. this was good from one standpoint, i.e. that the students would be using the programs that an ad agency or similar would be using. It was bad from the standpoint though that most of the students could not afford all of these adobe products on their own. This meant that as they were taking these courses, they had to get all their work done on either their classroom computers or the library's computers. They could not work on their projects at home. These projects were very time consuming. Ideally, they were also the logical jumping off point for the student to do a great deal of experimentation. However, you weren't going to do much experimenting in the classroom or library if you'd already put in hours and hours of work in fairly uncomfortable circumstances of sitting in the typical classroom or library chair. If you are a student with a fair amount of discretionary income for school supplies, you can solve this problem by buying the student versions of the adobe programs. If you are a student who is financially hard pressed from semester to semester, the GIMP gives you a creative experimenting opportunity otherwise not available to you. I should add that the instructors cannot tell, when looking at your completed project, what program you did it on. They are looking at the end result only. If your end result is A material, it doesn't matter what you did it on. This is also where originality of idea pays off more than flexing your muscles with the hardest techniques. It is NOT GOOD if your work looks like everyone else's and that is the great weakness of digital art straight across the board (largely because of the overemphasis on technique over idea). The instructors don't care about anything but the artistic merit of the results. If I were the student, I'd just go home and do the art work on the Gimp where I could have all my comforts around me for the days and days of long hours needed to produce the art work. you could do some of the art work in the classroom in photoshop and then store it online before you left so you could pick it up at home. What you say makes a lot of sense. Your approach is one that focusses on matching the tool to the need. That
Re: [Gimp-user] Bit-depth Processing
On Tuesday 02 October 2007 10:50:44 Elwin Estle wrote: I am hardly an expert on this whole issue. I would like to see a side by side comparison of prints made from 8 bit vs 16 bit images to see just exactly what the difference might be. I think your average person probably wouldn't care. It has been mentioned that monitors are poor venues on which to view digital photographic images as far as bit depth is concerned. However, I am curious to know what your opinion is of this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm I do know that for me, Gimp makes the difference between no image editing program at all and having an image editing program. Photoshop is simply out of the question for me for a number of reasons. Cost is, of course, one reason (but it is interesting the number of people I have run across who feel that acquiring a bootleg version of PS is an acceptable thing to do). Part of it is that I use Windows under duress. So, if I wanted to seriously consider PS, then I would have to look at a Mac. If they ever bothered to port PS to Linux/Unix, it might be more of a consideration. However, I still feel that First I think you are right in suggesting that the sticker price for PS is utterly ridiculous for the average user. IMHO photoshop is NOT a tool designed for the average user. If I was only interested in collecting and taking images for my own use (which is by and large waht the average user does) I would not use photoshop. However when I need to produce images for professional use then I must have raw files - I must for some clients be able to prove their authenticity (i.e. the file I make available is just as it was taken). So for professional uses I need photoshop and I keep it constantly up to date.. no average user would be able to afford that but I create well over 10,000 digital images a year (mostly using my two Canon 5D bodies as well as countless images on film in formats that include 35mm, 6x6cm, 6x7cm and 5x4. However I do not use photoshop for preparing images for the web or projection.. In that context I find it to be a sledgehammer for cracking nuts. In this context I use a number of different tools with gimp being a natural starting point but I also use Corel draw, fireworks, and a whole host of other images for manipulating images. For operating systems I use five different computers. Apple (photoshop), Windows XP 64 bit on a quad processor Intel system (photoshop and premiere) Windows Xp 32 bit on an AMD 64 processor (photoshop) system, Freebsd (Gimp and network management) and linux (gimp and other image manipulation programmes). They all have a part to play in my image creation manipulation endeavours. As a professional one picks the right tool for the task and one cannot afford prejudices. It sounds to me like you do not need photoshop so stick with gimp and begin to ask questions when you run into limitation. If you were disatissfied you would be looking at your work, be discontent with some part of it and be asking about things you cannot achieve with the tools you already have. My two pennorth The article you link to is reflects the sentiments of the writer. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] GIMP vs Photoshop UI
On Friday 28 September 2007 10:45:14 Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 04:04 -0700, gimp_user wrote: While the absence of a recognised skill transition route (i.e. no skin similar to PS) is a serious obstacle affecting the ability of multiple individuals to collaborate in a supply chain comprising multiple organisations it is far from being the only reason while Gimp is not currently in a position to seriously challenge PS. On Friday 28 September 2007 09:14:50 gimp_user wrote: On Friday 28 September 2007 06:20:05 gimp_user wrote: On Friday 28 September 2007 04:04:03 gimp_user wrote: On Thursday 27 September 2007 08:00:45 George Farris wrote: --- gimp_user [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...[GIMP] does not have an interface that makes for an easy user transition from the industry PS standard it is not a tool that is ready for adoption by high quality image makers. FUD your conclusion is only valid for yourself and not others so your statement is false. You can't speak for me and I don't agree with you so... If you can provide hard data that backs this up with numbers well that might be a different story but it would have to be global figures. Thanks I would rather you did not chop extracts from the whole of my text and thereby portray a misleading impression of a theme referencing multiple strands. The difficulty that idividuals face in switiching from one software interface to another naturally varies from individual to individual. But that is no way intended to be interpreted as the core of my contribution. My original posting was intended to draw attention to multiple layers of reality that contribute to professional decision about software choices that go well beyond costs of acquirement. Recruitment is based upon assessment of levels of experience and known skills. Someone who says Well I know Gimp but I am sure I could adapt to photoshop is going to face an uphill struggle convincing an agency that he has all the right skills. His statement would be taken as evidence of not understanding the role of an individual contributor in a complex supply chain. While the absence of a recognised skill transition route (i.e. no skin similar to PS) is a serious obstacle affecting the ability of multiple individuals to collaborate in a supply chain comprising multiple organisations it is far from being the only reason while Gimp is not currently in a position to seriously challenge PS. You are making the wrong assumption here that GIMP would want to challenge PS. It doesn't, that's not how Free Software works. Actually if you had not had not cut out the part of my contribution that is relevant to this point you will see I actually said: I am not saying Gimp should choose to set out to do so. I am saying that while, in its present state it will continue to satisfy the needs of many individuals, such as yourself. It is also my opinion that it has the potential to fulfill the wider expectations of a collaborative industry of high quality image makers. GIMP has different goals than Photoshop and instead of concentrating on being as similar to Photoshop as possible, our feature set and user interface will in the future diverge even further from Photoshop. IT would be interesting to see what those goals are. This discussion started because users who are making a considerable investment in time to learn gimp are also interested in knowing how they can use it in the future. This discussion is therefore at least as relevant to users as it is to developers. Wether or no GIMP is planning to develop in ways that will provide non-destructive editing and full support for raw and 16+ bit is something that is really relevant and the views of users need to be sought. Simply because we have a different vision for what GIMP should become and because we believe that this vision is a lot more interesting than trying to compete with a commercial product. OK but how do users contribute to the vision creation process? As soon as GIMP 2.4 is released, we will start to integrate GEGL to the GIMP core and our plans for an image manipulation program based on GEGL go way beyond what Photoshop offers. We are all ears. By selective quoting you leave out the substance of an argument which was never intended to apply to a lone worker. So your objection that it does not apply to you, as an individual, is totally irrelevant. It also suggest to me that you have not carefully read and understood the theme. What I would like to see is gimp competing, in the industry supply chain, on at least equal terms with PS and that cannot happen overnight. It would be foolish to suggest that that could be achieved by simply having a GUI that makes for an easy transition. PS has to be considered not just as a tool for for high
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Monday 09 July 2007 00:11:09 Axel Wernicke wrote: Hi list, answering this kind of questions and explainig why exactly we can not support GimpShop is a waste of time and done again and again and again... ... This clearly is a F.A.Q, which should we be able to answer by politely providing a link to an FAQ entry on gimp.org. This could save us lots of time which could be much better spend in further GIMP developement. So how about we put together the top ten arguments to the ten questions that is the most time wasted on the list(s)? This way we could shorten the discussions about Why the GimpShop is not GIMP, What we think about the Single Window Interface, Why GIMP is proud of its name and so on... It seems to me there are two issues which seem to be confused and rolled into one seeminly illogical construct. 1. Whether some contributors to this list should take it upon themselves to try and stop other contributors, who either wish to discuss gimpshop issues from doing so. 2. Whether gimpshop should be declared as being officially supported by the list owners. On the first point my reaction to those adopting an authoritarian position is come on guys loosen up. It gives the impression that a few people with an axe to grind want to freeze out gimpshop rather than encouraging any extensions of gimp, of which gimpshop is one, to mature. A failure to encourage imaginative inititiatives and development discourages expanision of a vigourous development community. IMHO what gimp needs, for its future growth, is much more energetic development community capable of bringing gimp to the point where it supports current technological requirements and standards. When one considers hao far behind the curve gimp is in supporting current needs and standards, (no 16 bit per channel support, flaky printing, no built in support for camera raw files, a clumsy gui that is not at all easy to use (especially for those trained in photoshop) and which does not compare favourably with standards set by photoshop. In such circumstances discouraging gimpshop developers and users seems to be irrational, dictatorial and counterproductive. 2. Whether to declare gimpshop as being officially supported is quite another matter. IMHO no user of this list is entitled to expect support even for the basic gimp. So my conclusion is to encourage negative thinklers to just back off. If anyone does want to discuss gimpshop issues and others care to join in (and I have evidence that they do) then those who do not want to do so would make a vaulable contribution to gimp by remaining silent. Lets work together to make the community larger and therefore stronger. Gimp needs to mature. It suffers from feature starvation in many crucial areas (one of which gimpshop has begun to solve) and anyone willing to work on or test such extensions should not IMHO be discouraged. my two pennorth David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Sunday 08 July 2007 14:37:01 Manish Singh wrote: On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 02:42:22PM -0700, David Southwell wrote: I rather gather there are those who disparage gimpshop and wish it to fail and those who wish it to succeed but are afraid of offending some members of the former group. Maybe gimp could benefit from a more catholic and generous approach being espoused by everyone. Maybe the creator of GimpShop should have respected the GIMP community instead of rejecting it. He did not consult anyone on any of the GIMP lists at all as to proper approaches, or even showed any interest in actually making useful contributions. Since GimpShop rejects the GIMP community, we respect that decision and do not support it here. If you have issues with this, take it up with the people who do GimpShop. They can't reject the community yet expect simultaneously expect it to provide support. Expectation is one thing. IMHO this response sounds like short term thinking maintained by by malevolent thinking. In the long term gimp needs an interface that will attract inductry standard users. It does noit have one. An appropriate response by this list is to encourage gimpshop back into the fold BECAUSE it has something valuable to contribute. Anything less is biting off ones nose to spite one's face. While your attitude may be understandable in the circumstances surely you must see that it does not make other feel this is a friendly, welcoming and thoughful community driven by a determination to act in the long term interests of users. IMHO it would be better to think of long term benefit rather rely on emotianally driven anger. That does not mean provide official or expected support. Just stop spitting or discouraging legitimate dialogue. David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Monday 09 July 2007 02:05:43 Karine Delvare wrote: On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 02:11:09 -0700 David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems to me there are two issues which seem to be confused and rolled into one seeminly illogical construct. 1. Whether some contributors to this list should take it upon themselves to try and stop other contributors, who either wish to discuss gimpshop issues from doing so. 2. Whether gimpshop should be declared as being officially supported by the list owners. On the first point my reaction to those adopting an authoritarian position is come on guys loosen up. It gives the impression that a few people with an axe to grind want to freeze out gimpshop rather than encouraging any extensions of gimp, of which gimpshop is one, to mature. This list is hosted by the GIMP project. If you want to discuss another project that openly rejected GIMP and refused to listen to the team's advices on how to properly implement Gimpshop to benefit from bugfixes and new releases, you can do so by finding another list or creating one yourself. You can't ask the GIMP project to not moderate the mailing list they host. Noone forces you to use this list if you dislike the way it is moderated. Who has asked anyone NOT to moderate?? Who benefits from such negativity? Noone -- it has certainly given me an impression of mean spritedness by a few and the practical experience of private generosity many. In fact I have received more private helpful emails from list users than there have been postings to the list. This seems to indicate that the authoritarian approach of a few is not really supported by the many. Who benefits from just sitting back if you do not want to contribute? Everyone. People who are not really happy about gimpshop do waste time trying to wag authoritarian fingers at those that do. A releaxed attitude makes everyone, except those who need to control others, happier. The community seems more welcoming and, who knows, either the attitude of gimpshop people may change or someone else might be encouraged to develop something like gimpshop in a more compatible way. Gimp desperately needs something like gimpshop. IMHO it is time to let go of anger and act in a mature and constructive way. David Southwell Does the list benefit from people wagging their finger and saying Who loses by j ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Monday 09 July 2007 02:06:53 Simon Budig wrote: David Southwell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On the first point my reaction to those adopting an authoritarian position is come on guys loosen up. It gives the impression that a few people with an axe to grind want to freeze out gimpshop rather than encouraging any extensions of gimp, of which gimpshop is one, to mature. To be frank, we - as the main Gimp developers - have been insulted by the gimpshop developer(s?) by them just taking our code, messing with it and just *no* communication. Additionally - as outlined earlier - the technical solutions used by Gimpshop are bad and hackish. E.g. Changing the strings to be more Photoshop-like immediately kills any of the dozends of translations we have available. Every Gimpshop Mail on this list annoys me, because of this abuse of gimp. This is the reason why we are touchy and not willing to loosen up. Please go ahead and create a mailinglist for gimpshop. This is not the place for it. Hold on to your anger if you must. But please do not inflict it on others or lose sight of longer term benefits and strategies ito the long term benefit of gimp. I hear your frustration and understand it. Can you noit see that the way you are responding to that friustration is counter-productive? Can you not see the anger and emotion is driving decision making rather than thoughtful long term strategies. am not saying this to create dissension but becasue I am genuinely concerned that the touchyness you acknowledge is leading to decisions that will harm rather than benefit gimp. Can you not see that anger and touchiness provides the energy that leads to schism and forks. Can you not see that the touchyness, anger and authoritarianism makes the whole project less attractive to potential developers. After all do you want to attract the type of developers who would want to to be involved in a community driven by such emotions? I suggest you treat gimpshop as an intermediate hack. Get the best out of it you can until someone is encouraged to dvevelop something more sophisticated. Leave those who discuss it on the list alone. Let a community build up who want something better and are willing to do it in the giimp way. Take a long term view and please let go of that touchyness and anger - it will harm everyone who has it and the project will be infected by it. David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Sunday 08 July 2007 14:37:01 Manish Singh wrote: On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 02:42:22PM -0700, David Southwell wrote: I rather gather there are those who disparage gimpshop and wish it to fail and those who wish it to succeed but are afraid of offending some members of the former group. Maybe gimp could benefit from a more catholic and generous approach being espoused by everyone. Maybe the creator of GimpShop should have respected the GIMP community instead of rejecting it. He did not consult anyone on any of the GIMP lists at all as to proper approaches, or even showed any interest in actually making useful contributions. You are reacting on a person centred rather than a project centred basis. It may be personally satisfying to you to believe you are punishing the gimpshop creator because you do not approve of what he did or how he did it. In fact you are only punishing those who might be drawn to use or contribute to gimp because gimpshop exists.IMHO it would be bnetter to let go of the negativity and explore long term positivity. Build up a community that wants something better but uses gimpshop as a temporary hack. Learn from gimpshop what is needed and then draw development energy from the community to develop something better. My plea is for you guys to stop using your guts to think and let your brains provide sound and constructive strategies for the long term benefit of gimp. David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Monday 09 July 2007 04:30:06 norman wrote: lots of snip Build up a community that wants something better but uses gimpshop as a temporary hack. Learn from gimpshop what is needed and then draw development energy from the community to develop something better. My plea is for you guys to stop using your guts to think and let your brains provide sound and constructive strategies for the long term benefit of gimp. I have been following this discussion and I think I can understand both points of view, to some extent. I have never heard of gimpshop and I read this list to learn about and to try to understand Gimp. Anything else is, in my opinion. irrelevant and should not appear here. Well gimpshop is an attempt (somewhat flawed, to provide a GUI for gimp that replicates the GUI for photoshop. basically it builds gimp as a dependency and hacks the gui so someone with photoshop experience can use gimp. To that extent it is very relevant because the majority of people who manipulate photographic images use photoshop. Currently gimpshop is a hack which if it were either more efficient or an alternative photoshop gui was available gimp would draw tens of thousands of users who would then see gimp as a viable alternative to photoshop. That would mean more developers, features and a bigger and better community of users. IMHO gimpshop is a great idea. According to some its developers have not behaved well -- my guess is there are two sides to the story. The important thing is to look to what can be provided not what can be stopped!! Currently all I am suggesting is that people with a history of scores to settle need to keep quiet and if others want to talk about gimpshop then let them do so. Noone is saying any single individual should feel obliged to contribute to those discussion. Let us be mature, open and flexible rather than driven by hostility. IMHO Developers have their struggles.. users are only interested in functionality rather than the politics of past struggles. David Southwell Davd ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Sunday 08 July 2007 14:37:01 Manish Singh wrote: On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 02:42:22PM -0700, David Southwell wrote: I rather gather there are those who disparage gimpshop and wish it to fail and those who wish it to succeed but are afraid of offending some members of the former group. Maybe gimp could benefit from a more catholic and generous approach being espoused by everyone. Maybe the creator of GimpShop should have respected the GIMP community instead of rejecting it. He did not consult anyone on any of the GIMP lists at all as to proper approaches, or even showed any interest in actually making useful contributions. Since GimpShop rejects the GIMP community, we respect that decision and do not support it here. If you have issues with this, take it up with the people who do GimpShop. They can't reject the community yet expect simultaneously expect it to provide support. This is a developer grudge centric response. There are millions of trained photoshop users out there. Most modern software seperates the view or (GUI) from the Model and the controller. This means that developing alternative skins (gui's) becomes s straightforward process. Maybe this discussion could be turned into examining the question -- How easy would it be to focus on facilitating the development of alternative skins (gui's) for gimp? A gui that emulates photoshop is really needed . Really gimpshop is part of gimp.. the version of gimpshop running on my system depends upon the latest version of gimp. David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Monday 09 July 2007 05:18:23 Raphaël Quinet wrote: On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 05:02:19 -0700, David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would mean more developers, features and a bigger and better community of users. IMHO gimpshop is a great idea. According to some its developers have not behaved well -- my guess is there are two sides to the story. The important thing is to look to what can be provided not what can be stopped!! Unfortunately, more users does not automatically mean more developers and more features. In some cases, this is even the opposite: some projects have seen their number of developers decrease as the number of users increased, because the community became worse (large number of conflicting user requests, unrealistic expectations, developer burn-out, etc.). You claim that there are two sides to the story regarding the development of Gimpshop. This may be the case, but I encourage you to take a look at the archive of the gimp-developer mailing list and find the early discussions about Gimpshop. Then see the suggestions about how to do it right and what happened since then (hint: Gimpshop is still a fork using modifications to the source code instead of being an add-on). As I wrote in my previous message, the GIMP developers are not opposed to some of the ideas included in Gimpshop, if only they were implemented in a correct way. The developers are open to suggestions and are looking at alternative solutions whenever possible. Just check the recent usability enhancements in SVN if you are not convinced about that. Currently all I am suggesting is that people with a history of scores to settle need to keep quiet and if others want to talk about gimpshop then let them do so. Noone is saying any single individual should feel obliged to contribute to those discussion. I don't think that I have a history of scores to settle with Gimpshop. If fact, I do not even remember contributing to previous discussions (I haven't checked, though). But please be a bit more open yourself and consider what others have written in the last days. Discussions about Gimpshop tend to create confusion on this list. Even if we ignore the technical and political aspects of how Gimpshop was implemented, the simple fact that any discussion about Gimpshop on this list tends to generate noise should be a sufficient reason to avoid such discussions in the future. This doesn't mean that Gimpshop is a taboo that should not be mentioned here. But instead of discussing it here, it would be much better to point users to a more specific mailing list. I hear you but do not agree with you entirely. Destructive discussion about whether gimpshop discussion between consenting adults should be allowed or not is like proposing the baby should be put out with the bathwater. There seem to be plenty of emotional reasons for doing so but no compelling logic for trying to ban it and it is the attempt to stamp it out that creates confusion.. not discussion between consenting adults. If discussion about gimpshop is left to those that want to discuss it then no harm is done but goodwill is earned by the gimp project. Such a simple step would show maturity -- anything else can be interpreted as an attack of juvenile pique. It seems to me that confusion on the list is created not by discussing gimpshop but by trying to rationalise an authoritarian approach to discussion. When all is said and done all that gimpshop does is create an alternative GUI for gimp. It does not do it well -- it could be done better but it is the best photoshop like gui that gimp has got. Until it gets better then the gimp community take full advantage of it and the fact that the gimpshop development team is not exactly bursting with energy. I do not know the history of how gimpshop developers and gimp developers fell out with one another. Frankly I amd most users do not care about how that happened but I am more concerned about how the future. I would like to see a viable photoshop emulating gui for gimp and 16+bit per channel, decent raw file handling and a far more easily customisable working environment that builds on industry wide knowledge. My guess is that if the code for gimp had been developed in accordance with MVC guidelines then the arguments between developers might not have arisen. That poses the question -- how can gimp code be developed so that the creation of alternative GUI's are facilitated? Thanks again David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Sunday 08 July 2007 02:41:26 you wrote: Hi, On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 02:34 -0700, David Southwell wrote: I have installed ports/gimpshop on my fFreebsd 6.1 system. I want to compare its functionality with photoshop with which I am extremely familar and use extensively on my Win XP system. Please ask on the gimpshop user list then. You might find that there is no such list. But we can't help you with gimpshop questions here. It is a different application and this is the gimp user list. Who is we.. I appreciate the helpful responses I have had from some people on this list. I just want to make clear that people who are accustomed to be positively helpful deserve encouragement and others, not of that disposition, IMHO contribute more to this worlld when they remain silent. Thanks David ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Sunday 08 July 2007 07:42:04 Patrick Shanahan wrote: * David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [07-08-07 10:36]: On Sunday 08 July 2007 02:41:26 you wrote: Please ask on the gimpshop user list then. You might find that there is no such list. But we can't help you with gimpshop questions here. It is a different application and this is the gimp user list. Who is we.. I appreciate the helpful responses I have had from some people on this list. I just want to make clear that people who are accustomed to be positively helpful deserve encouragement and others, not of that disposition, IMHO contribute more to this worlld when they remain silent. You are off base and *need* to curb your tongue. This is *not* a list for support of gimpshop which is a fork of gimp and totally unsupported here. AND you are remanding one of the *staunchest* gimp supporters. Get *your* facts straight before running your mouth (via your fingers). What facts have I not got correct? IMHO you are entitled to your point of view and I would not want to discourage you from expressing it .. after all I am sure you would agree that neither I nor anyone else is above criticism. Thank you David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] 16 Bit files
On Sunday 08 July 2007 08:05:45 Kim Johansson wrote: Then it seems like it will come some day. ;) http://wiki.gimp.org/gimp/UserFaq#head-455dd92a98eee71c3c35de7fd48065e75d3c 92ca 2007/7/8, Patrick Shanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [07-08-07 10:33]: Is there any chance of Gimp supporting 16 bit color in the near future? or is it doomed to be limited to 8 bit which is not really suitable for manipulating high quality digital images? Answered in the wiki. -- Patrick Thanks -- actually before posting I had tried a search on the wiki for 16 bit but got the search engine gave me no results - however- before I had a chance to ask you where on earth I could find it Kim pointed me in the right direction. Thanks anyway. Kim Thanks very much being so helpful and pointing me precisely in the right direction.. it is appreciated. Anyone... Finally does anyone have a handle on the timeframe for 2.4?? David Y ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
On Sunday 08 July 2007 12:07:55 Sven Neumann wrote: Hi, On Sun, 2007-07-08 at 07:48 -0700, David Southwell wrote: I just want to make clear that people who are accustomed to be positively helpful deserve encouragement and others, not of that disposition, IMHO contribute more to this worlld when they remain silent. I just tried to help you by pointing out that gimpshop is a different application and that you should try to get support for it from the people who did the fork. If you did that you might have found out that there is no such support. You might then reconsider your decision, but that is of course completely up to you. Am I not correct in saying that gimpshop a tool using gimp? Judging by the helpful replies I have received gimpshop is also of considerable interest to many users of gimp who use this list. It might be considerably improved by a being better supported by those who are advocates of gimp. I rather gather there are those who disparage gimpshop and wish it to fail and those who wish it to succeed but are afraid of offending some members of the former group. Maybe gimp could benefit from a more catholic and generous approach being espoused by everyone. IMHO the gimp community could benefit from the offer of an interface that more closely resembles photoshop. How that might be achieved maybe another matter. Your encouragement of all alternatives might lead to a wider adoption and respect for gimp. While I am sure you were not ill intentioned IMHO the tone of response did not make me feel welcomed or helped and I have reason for believing I am not the only one to have reached such a conclusion. Thanks David Southwell ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Gimp - gimpshop - newbie
Hi I have installed ports/gimpshop on my fFreebsd 6.1 system. I want to compare its functionality with photoshop with which I am extremely familar and use extensively on my Win XP system. I have started gimp and have two newbie questions. 1. How do I get to start gimpshop? The docs seem to have detailed documentation but although I have searched much head scratching -- I seem unable to find a page that tells me how to get gimpshop running :-( 2. I found that gimp will itself will open *.jpg but does not open raw files - In my case in need to be able to open canon raw files *.cr2 and would also like to be able to open photoshop *.psd files. Here is a list of the relevant gimp packages installed and OS version info: # pkg_info |grep gimp gimp-2.2.15,2 The meta-port for The Gimp gimp-help-0.12 GIMP user's manual gimp-print-4.2.7_3 GIMP Print Printer Driver gimpshop-2.2.11_5 GIMP fork resembling Adobe Photoshop # uname -a FreeBSD --- 6.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE #0: Sun May 7 04:15:57 UTC 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/SMP amd64 Thanks in advance david ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
