Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
On Wednesday 20 June 2007 20:48, Kevin Cozens wrote: Jon Cosby wrote: How about providing a link to the article? The only mention of Gimp I see in the July issue is on processing Web images The article in question appears to be the one that starts on page 34 of the July 2007 issue of LJ. I take it you mean the American version of Linux Journal? (There is another, and much better, IMHO, Linux Journal published in Europe. ) -- Bob Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 21:17 -0400, Brendan wrote: ... The name doesn't help either. Just basing this on countless interactions I've had with models or other photographers sitting here near my workstation, seeing me download my images and go through my workflow of digikam download - Gqview to delete the bad ones - Gimp to edit the good ones - showfoto to apply different color effects (Infra, BW conversion, etc.) I have to agree with Brendan on this one. While I realize that the name holds a lot of weight and recognition within the open source community, it is actually real a barrier to gaining acceptance in the larger CG community. I've tried to introduce several web designers and photographers to this eminently useful program, and every single one of them has been taken aback by the name. When I go on to explain the meaning of the acronym the usual response is something along the lines of Oh... they really should come up with something better... In fact, though I now use the Gimp on nearly a daily basis, I distinctly remember that when I first heard of and started using it (back before the .com bubble went pop) that the name was at best unsuitable for marketing purposes in my soon-to-be Internet media empire. Had I not been on an pro-Linux / anti-Microsoft warpath at the time, I may well have shelled out the cash for Photoshop. I've basically been desensitized to the offensiveness of the word in the English context, but most non-Gimp users have not. And as Brendan points out, clients are *not* impressed by something with an offensive name. There's a similar phenomenon in the audio production business where everyone (see: narrow minded producers) knows about ProTools, and not using it can actually eliminate some customers. Just to clarify, I don't really care about the name, but many of my clients have. ~B ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
On Thursday 21 June 2007 21:17, Brendan wrote: On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Eric P wrote: I really get peeved by these types of articles. GIMP is GIMP. Krita is Krita. CinePaint is CinePaint. Each is a tool. Use the right tool for the job. There are lots of hammers. Some are good for some projects. Others are good for other projects. None are good for all projects. As an author, he should know that and write accordingly. In this case, it looks like he's more interested in publicly bashing one tool (which would be an opinion piece, which this is not intended to be) instead of trying to help his readers (a reference piece or review, which this *is* intended to be). In the Open Source world Gimp is the best (most mature, fastest, most fully featured etc.) replacement for Photoshop. That said, for print use it needs to be able to work in the cmyk world and also be able to use icc profiles. If Krita, Scribus etc. can add these features then Gimp should be able to also. The reason why people want to have Gimp tools transferred to Krita is that Krita can work in cmyk, and Gimp's progress in this regard seems to be asymptotic, closer and closer but it never seems to get there. Krita is however dead slow. I use nothing but Open Source, and Gimp is one of my favorites. But my business is publishing and I need cmyk. -- John Culleton Able Indexing and Typesetting Precision typesetting (tm) at reasonable cost. Satisfaction guaranteed. http://wexfordpress.com ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Rachael H. wrote: Same here. I read that article and felt like they were bashing the Gimp. I did download Krista to see how it worked. I ended up uninstalling since it ran pretty slow. Seems like everything for KDE With Krita, what's exciting is how fast it progresses. It has insanely advanced features, but is still missing the basics in many ways. And now I'm so used to Gimp that I'm not sure if it was just me, or actual, but I felt the UI was veryrestrictive. runs slow! *LOL* Anyways I'm really used to the Gimp and it's fast The only thing I would add is the fact that the progress bars that seem to move at wildly different speeds (move quickly, pause, move quickly, pause, then suddenly the operation is done) make the speed feel...slow. showfoto under KDE has a great progress bar, and it seems to judge how long something will take very accurately. Photoshop has a good one...It makes it feel like you can gauge how long something will take... compared to other image editing software I used. In fact Im going to college for Media Arts Animation and they require you to use Photoshop..I have yet to use that program and even got some other Still think that having a shortcut layout that mimics PS would be a great feature. Just a shortcut list that's easily loadable like the Theme selector in Preferences. Would make it so easy to get a bunch of people over...but alas, talking about that got me banned from the list by the Dynamic Duo, so I'll shut up about it. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Eric P wrote: I really get peeved by these types of articles. GIMP is GIMP. Krita is Krita. CinePaint is CinePaint. Each is a tool. Use the right tool for the job. There are lots of hammers. Some are good for some projects. Others are good for other projects. None are good for all projects. As an author, he should know that and write accordingly. In this case, it looks like he's more interested in publicly bashing one tool (which would be an opinion piece, which this is not intended to be) instead of trying to help his readers (a reference piece or review, which this *is* intended to be). Nice retort. You should consider sending that to LJ's 'reader letters' section (which I always read as soon as my sub arrives in the mail). I've never been able to understand all the excessive bashing that GIMP regularly gets (UI complaints, color space limitations [which has I don't see much more bashing than anything else. It's the Windows Virus Syndrome: Gimp is just about the only great image editor in the Linux world with any serious usage over time, so it's going to get nailed by opinions. It also has a very different UI from most, so... And the color issues relate to it replacing PS for high-end work. I think people are saying Aww, shucks, I wish Gimp had this so I could ditch PS not Darn, I can't use Gimp to edit Little Susie's pictures because it doesn't have CMYK. Most newbies open up Gimp, see three weird windows pop up with a How-To dialog and say Yuck, what's this?. The name doesn't help either. Just basing this on countless interactions I've had with models or other photographers sitting here near my workstation, seeing me download my images and go through my workflow of digikam download - Gqview to delete the bad ones - Gimp to edit the good ones - showfoto to apply different color effects (Infra, BW conversion, etc.) In that context, it's quite easy to understand why people have strong opinions about it, especially since PS is a big chunkachange. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
[Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
The latest Linux Journal sure doesn't have much good to say about GIMP (Deep Images). Talks about it being a dinosaur and being left behind by the likes of Cinepaint, Krita and Pixel. Sure hope there isn't a GIMP 2.6 but rather it moves to GIMP 3.0 based on GEGL with a UI revamp. I kind of like the GIMP but I do agree with some of the things said about it in the article. ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
Michael J. Hammel wrote: In truth, the patches were rejected because the developers felt they implemented the right solution the wrong way. And the developers chose the right way over the quick way. Argue that as good or bad as you like. But I don't believe they dismissed the patches out of hand. Developers: feel free to correct me on this. Sounds like the article uses Cinepaint propaganda without original research. Michael -- GIMP http://www.gimp.org | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Wiki http://wiki.gimp.org | .de: http://gimpforum.de Plug-ins http://registry.gimp.org | ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
Re: [Gimp-user] Wow Linux Journal not very enamoured with GIMP.
Jon Cosby wrote: How about providing a link to the article? The only mention of Gimp I see in the July issue is on processing Web images The article in question appears to be the one that starts on page 34 of the July 2007 issue of LJ. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |What are we going to do today, Borg? Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 |Same thing we always do, Pinkutus: | Try to assimilate the world! #include disclaimer/favourite | -Pinkutus the Borg ___ Gimp-user mailing list Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user
