Slashdot Mirror

Not quite dead maybe?

http://www.cinepaint.org/2013/...

Lol. In Linux or free unix desktop land you're a slave to software dependencies and chasing down half-assed solutions to common desktop application type tasks. On my mac, I spend a total of about 1 hour per 18 months on operating system upgrades. I've been there, done that, and will GLADLY pay the software licensing cost to get what I want done with a minimum of fucking about.

On my Mac I run Snow Leopard and Ubuntu 12.04 and I love the freedom to run whatever software I can. Now if Adobe were to port Photoshop CS to Linux, and drop the price, I and many other Linux users would use it too. Because I can't afford CS for OS X I'll try both CinePaint and Krita for deep color editing of my photos. I am willing to give up a little tyme maintaining my system for freedom to do what I want. Giving up freedom is what makes you a slave, not the other way around.

Falcon

I used to be a GNUStep proponent as well. But in the end it was the lack of apps that killed it. Well not killed it but put it in life support. If you want GIMP you have GTK+ as a dependency, same thing goes for Inkscape. Applications rule put simply. Otherwise you could just use a regular window manager.

There are CinePaint and Krita to replace GIMP with. To tell the truth I've been waiting 15 year for GIMP to edit in at least 16 bits per color channels and it still does not.

Falcon

@ submittor: if you don't like OSX 10.8 (Mountain Lion), why not just go back to snow leopard? It's stable as a rock. My personal opinion is I like the additional usability in mountain lion, but obv ymmv.

I'm typing this on a MaBook Pro running Snow Leopard (OS X 10.6). Actually I dual-boot it, with Ubuntu 12.04. I switched from MS Windows to Linux and OS X because I don't like how MS treats it's customers, like criminals. Which is what Activation is all about. However now Apple is acting in a similar way. Mountain Lion has to be downloaded and installed via the app store. Snow Leopard was the last OS X that came on an optical disc. After that Lion came on a USB Flash drive but Mountain Lion has to be downloaded. Seeing as this MBP is getting old, approaching 6 years I may replace it with the last MBP version that's 17", or maybe a 15" running Lion. But after that I think I've replace my laptop with one running Linux.

As for a desktop, I have a Quad Core also running Ubuntu 12.04. I have installed KDE along with Unity to try on the desktop. Using Virtualbox I'm preparing to install Linux Mint and Arch Linux in VMs to try out. I'll install both on a USB Flash drive which I can use on both my desktop and my laptop. On Mint I plan to try MATE, Cinnamon, and KDE to see what I prefer. For Arch I haven't decided yet what desktop environment(s) I'll use. I only plan to use it because it comes with CinePaint, it does deep color editing which I want to do with my photography while GIMP does not. I'll try Krita for the same reason, though not as deep as CinePaint.

Falcon

There's nothing wrong with the name, per se. It just has unfortunate connotations.

Let's say that after OpenOffice.org had to be split off, rather than than the already baffling 'LibreOffice', they had gone with Phree Open Office Program.

Instead of Blender, it could have been Free Animation/Rendering Toolchain.

Instead of Linux it could have been Free UNIX Command Kit.

And really, nothing would have been wrong with those names per se. Until you try explaining to somebody that you're using FART and The GIMP to make some graphics for your POOP Impress presentation on your FUCK machine. That's when you're treated to raised eyebrows, at the least.

That, in part, is why Film GIMP was quickly renamed to CinePaint; a paint app used primarily in the film industry, which tends to be pretty Linux-heavy as it is and is filled with geeks who would 'understand' GIMP just fine.
http://www.cinepaint.org/more/press/cinepaint.pr.2003.3.1.html
( The other part being that it started to be less and less GIMP-based and more cobbled together from various open source applications, so keeping 'GIMP' in there just stopped making sense anyway. But they still decided on something that "will present a more professional name". )

The GIMP developers, however, brush off criticism with the FAQ entry: "GIMP is comfortable with its name and thinks that you should apologise for your rudeness".

That said, sources are available. It would be exceedingly trivial - short of evil bits of code in the source - to search&replace all of the 'GIMP' strings used for presentation and complying with the remainder of the licenses and publish an alternative build. I don't think anybody does. So as much as people like to complain about the name, it seems it's not enough for an issue for people to do something about it. There's bigger dragons to slay in The GIMP. Single window mode was a big one. GEGL getting fully implemented is another. User friendliness of various tools is next. ( imho they made a misstep with the new 'save as' behavior, but that's more of a personal preference. )

I'm booted into Snow Leopard

At first I misunderstood that you were violently forced into using SL.

Only partially. After using MS Windows for years I was getting fed up with constant crashes, BSODs, and new installs when it came tyme to get a new PC. Then I found out MS was treating its customers like criminals. If I buy software I should not have to let that software contact the mother ship to see if it can run. And that's what Activation does. Even on a brand new PC with MS Windows installed, if Windows is not allowed to contact MS servers or an MS phone number is not called, after 30 days Windows will not allow full use of the OS. So when I got a new PC it came with Linux preinstalled, and when I got a laptop I bought my MacBook Pro. Now unless MS stops this if I have a choice I will not buy another MS product.

I wanted to buy Photoshop but because Adobe is also requiring activation I won't be buying it if I don't need to. For now I plan to install Arch Linux, which comes with CinePaint, in a Virtualbox virtual machine.

Falcon

I just got a new PC with Windows 7 and (non-secure) EFI booting. It seems like only Ubuntu-derived distros know how to set up to be booted on such a system. And it's kind of hit-and-miss with a lot of manual intervention required even at that. Apparently there are more hurdles involved with EFI than just 'turn off secure boot' - a lot more. And there is no consistency between firmware implementations, so no place to go to get a straightforward explanation of what to do. If you're struggling with this too, let me recommend rEFInd - not magic, but its author at least tries his darndest to explain why it's all so hard and what you can do about it. And it works (that helps).

I'm typing this on my MacBook which dual-boots, Snow Leopard and Ubuntu 12.04. I use rEFIt as the boot selector. With Snow Leopard already installed I only had one problem installing 64 bit 12.04. For some reason it would not install when I tried. So I tried installing 11.10 and it wouldn't install, then 11.04 didn't work either. Finally I got 10.10 to install. From there I upgraded to first 11.04, then 11.10, and finally to 12.04. But when I got it installed it was 32 bit not 64 bit. Just for the heck of it I inserted the 64 bit 12.04 DVD and tried again. This tyme it installed. So unless I used a different disk the second tyme than I used the first tyme and the first was bad, I don't know why it didn't work at first.

Anyway, I ended up with Mint

I may try Mint, with Cinnamon, MATE, KDE but I'm not sure. I plan on trying Arch Linux though, it includes software Debian based distros don't, CinePaint. As a photographer I want CinePaint, and GIMP does not cut it as a professional print photo editor.

Falcon

Even when both user and dev are programmers of the same skill level there's a huge gulf in knowledge. A 5 hour patch for the user might be a 5 minute job for a dev since they've already learned the code. So I generally use my dev skills to give a really good description of the problem and test cases. Usually the only times I write a patch are when it's a feature specifically for me, or I've gone into so much detail finding the bug I already found the fix.

It may be a specific case but when I hear or read others asking how to get experience programming frequently some replies are to see what bugs have been submitted to FOSS projects, pick one, and submit a patch to the project leaders.

And that's a great idea to gain programming experience, just realize that it's more of a way to learn programming than a way to make a big contribution, you basically need to find a bug that's easy to fix (so you can handle it), and not a lot of people care about (or someone else would have made the easy patch first).

The best bet is to find some little one or two dev project on SF or something (try a niche end user project like a podcast manager), there the code should be easier to understand, the bugs should be easier to find and fix without side effects, and the work will be more important to the project since it's less likely to be an obscure function no-one uses.

I don't have much experience programming myself but I've been thinking about trying my hand with CinePaint, a fork of GIMP with deep color editing. It used to be included in Ubuntu but when Debian dropped it so did Ubuntu and that's what I use now. I could try something easier but I want to do deep color editing of my photographs, and GIMP does not do that. The only other bit map graphics software that does deep color is Krita but it's lacking as a photo editor.

Falcon

More like three generations since the word entered the lexicon in 1952 (or thereabouts). But I do take your point. And I know people who prefer to be called crippled as well. But far from the majority of people.

And this is what I was saying about context. Even in the case of words who have a hateful history, it is still inappropriate — in most people's minds — to use them generally, in public, in what we might call the "default context". Gimp is one of those words.

Even if you say, as many people in this discussion have, that the GIMP team meant Gimp in the Pulp Fiction S&M sense; I don't get why that is anyway more appropriate.

Context matters and you have to walk a very long way to get to a point where Gimp is an appropriate name for a program intended to be used by the masses. Most people aren't going to take that walk with you. Just like if you have to explain a joke, it isn't funny; so it is that if you have to explain why something isn't offensive, it is a lost cause.

The name hurts the app. To the best of my knowledge they have no corporate sponsorship, no companies donating developers and other resources. The closest you get is CinePaint which is a fork of GIMP, isn't worked on by the GIMP team, and (we should all notice) changed the name.

I am not saying all will be rosy if they change the name, but it would be a step in the right direction.

well every time I see it come up it starts with "I am used to photoshop but because of XYZ I cant get the newest version, the gimp seems ok but ..."

Once in a while I'll hear or see that however a more common remark as to why people switched to GIMP from PS is because they learned GIMP does everything they need. For them I say bravo, they're not locked into a single vendor and they're saving money. However GIMP isn't suitable for every graphic artist or professional photographer. And for them I would suggest they try CinePaint and or Krita before buying or upgrading PS CS. They're both deep paint editors.

I haven't followed my own advice yet, but then again I haven't used Linux much and I haven't spent the money on PS CS either. Though I did for Photoshop Elements (PE). When PE is no longer adequate and CinePaint and Krita don't work either, that is when I have to get PS CS, I'll buy an older upgradable version on eBay, or somewhere else, first then upgrade. But I'm hoping CinePaint and or Krita is be fine.

Falcon

Is it really dumbing it down or spending just a few seconds thinking what other users want to do, and improving the interface to do it?

That's why GIMPShop exists? Because GIMP has a better interface that Photoshop?

Your product might be the best and most powerful in the whole world, but if no one can use it, what good does it do?

Thousands if not hundreds of thousands if not millions of people use Photoshop. How is that "no one can use it"? Can GIMP use and edit photos in 32 bits per colour channel? Don't bother answering I will. No it can't!!! The best GIMP can do is 8 bits per channel for a total of 24 bits. People, that is photographers and other artists have been asking for higher colour depths for years but will GIMP developers ever allow it? Again no. In 1998 Robin Rowe offered higher bit depths but GIMP devs refused to use it. So Robin forked GIMP and released FilmGIMP. It is now called CinePaint. And while it has 32 bit colour depths GIMP is still using only 8 bits.

Eight bit per colour channel is fine for the web, at least right now, but it seriously is lacking for professional print work.

Falcon

The GIMP guys are working towards support for 16 bits per channel. I was hoping to learn about the progress toward that, but I didn't see it discussed here; mostly people were griping about UI.

As I understand it, the GIMP core engine has 8 bits per channel pretty much hard-wired into it and it would be a pain to fix that. Instead, the GIMP guys have been working on a new engine called GEGL, and this was designed from the ground up to handle higher bit depths and to allow non-destructive editing. I believe GIMP 2.8 is the target for full GEGL integration. GIMP 2.7.x has GEGL partly integrated (used in some filters).

Meanwhile, if you need something like GIMP that supports high bit depth right now, take a look at CinePaint, a fork of GIMP hacked to support 16 bits per plane; it has been used for post-processing in movies. According to Wikipedia, it has fallen out of use because GIMP can do anything it can do; but that seems wrong to me, because GIMP doesn't have 16 bit per plane support yet.

I was really hoping that people who know about this stuff would post about it here.

P.S. It's from 2007, but here is an article about HDR photo editing on Linux. http://lwn.net/Articles/225652/

steveha

That's what I said.

but if you don't have studio (or some other well-heeled backer) money behind you it's a serious investment for an individual or two to make.

But it does not have to be a serious financial investment. The "EOS 5D Mark II can record up to 4GB per clip or record up to a maximum continuous video capture time of 29 minutes and 59 seconds, whichever comes first. This means you can get about 12 minutes HD video or 24 minutes of SD video on a 4GB memory card." Amazon lists the price at $2700. I don't recall what camera it is but there used to be an ad on TV for a digital camera, the camera was used to make the ad. While software can be expensive relatively, it doesn't have to be. Amazon lists Final Cut Studio, Apple's video editing suite, for just over $800. For free there's CinePaint which is open source. It started out as FilmGIMP when the author added 16 bit colour depths but the developers of GIMP did not accept it. A number of movies were made that used CinePaint. That about page lists some, such as the "Harry Potter" movies, Sean Connery's "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen", and Tom Cruise's "Last Samurai".

I haven't done it yet but I want to start a business as a photographer and I may do some videography as well.

Falcon

http://www.cinepaint.org/

No GIMP in the URL, no GIMP in the splash screen, etc.

Yes, see cinepaint, designed so some poor bastard can sit for hours meticulously painting high bit depth film scans, frame by frame, just because the blue screen guy was slacking off.

Maybe Cinepaint will be more palatable? It is a fork of GIMP.

Go to Dell.com and configure an Alienware M17x.

I did. The difference between the M17x and the 17" MacBook Pro was $75. However it comes with Windows. I switched from Windows because I was sick and tired of my PCs crashing and needing to reinstall Windows. I was not going to spend $3000 only to find out I made another mistake buying Windows again.

Even if you're buying the LCD yourself and including it in the cost of the laptop, the total price will come to around $2500. $500 *less* than the number you're asking for.

BS! It was less than $100. No where near your $500.

Also, you won't find a laptop that runs at 1900x1200 internal resolution,

Okay 1920 not 1900, that's better, look at the MacBook Pro specs. " Supported resolutions : 1920 by 1200 (native)". Even the Alienware offers that, "17-inch WideUXGA 1920x1200 (1200p)". Cut and paste.

And while I realize that it's not running Linux out of the box, you'll find that it's not difficult to reinstall Linux on that system if you like.

But I have to pay the Microsoft tax. Sure I could demand a refund from Alienware, but what's the likelihood I would get it, in a reasonable tyme period? And how much would it be? Probably less than $100 which is less than the upgrade price of Windows 7. And if I installed Ubuntu could I install Photoshop CS4? I plan on installing Ubuntu Studio on my Mac, to tryout CinePaint. But if it does not work out for me I'll want Photoshop. I can install it in Snow Leopard but I don't think I can in Ubuntu. Maybe in another year but not now.

Falcon

You'd be lucky to get that amount of detail out of the film; grain size is going to be an issue, but the optics of the scanner as well.

Ce depend, er that depends. Different films have different grain sizes even discounting film speed or ISO. Fuji Velvia for instance has bigger grain than some film but finer than others. As for my scanner, as I said it can optically scan 6400 dpi, interpolated resolution is 12,800. Still scanning at 4800 dpi still generates a good sized file, especially at 32 never mind 48 bit colour depths. And yes Photoshop can work with those depths, unlike GIMP which only works at 8 bit depths.

But then we're back to the "do you really need to store an image at that size?". See the quality concerns up above and in my previous post. Assume you would, some day, actually print this..

And I dealt with both of these in previous posts. If you want as high a quality as possible you want large files and for print it matters.

Note that this is typically a combined value. E.g. 16bits for red, green, and blue (16+16+16 = 48). 16bits isn't bad, by the way.. 16bits is good.. 16 bits is great! 32bits is even better but not even the film (movie) industry deals with 32bit very often.

I don't know what colour depths movie studios use a lot but CinePaint is used by studios a lot and it works with 32 bit colour depths. Of course the problem that neither of us has mentioned yet is that software and storage isn't the limiting factor when talking about high bit colour channels, the limiting factor are monitors and graphics cards that drive them. A monitor I was thinking I'd like to get, when I could afford it, was the HP DreamColor LP2480zx, however some comments aren't good.

Well that's the thing though, isn't it... if you're going to be using it in the very near future, then you'd have to find a way to get a bigger drive to begin with..

Oh, that's my plan. I want to start working as a photographer and as finances allow I'll upgrade my hardware. And maybe software, but I want to try FOSS programs first. Because buying Photoshop CS3 never mind CS4 would put a strain on my finances, I'm on disability and unemployed, I've been thinking about installing Ubuntu Studio which includes the afore mentioned CinePaint to edit photos. That's what I like about microstock websites, I can start with what I have now then if, with as many others using them a big if, and when I start to make money I can roll the income into better equipment.

if your tool of choice is Photoshop, then setting the quality to highest/100 will do. If you use The GIMP, there's several options there you can use to specify the exact JPEG encoding to have as little loss as possible.

If Film GIMP, CinePaint, doesn't do what I'll want then I'll try to get Photoshop.

Shooting (near-)IR with an 87 filter can be fun, yes, and it's certainly a lot easier and cheaper to do with a point-and-shoot.

I shot 35mm IR film before, but that was a long tyme ago. Having a digicam that has the ability would be easier. The "Make" article I said I read mentioned some cameras that were good for IR photography. I wonder what the photos would look like shooting astrophotography, one of the areas I want to shoot, in IR. I have, though haven't tried it yet, the Meade ETX80 telescope and camera mount for my camera.

Good luck with the developing - E6 shouldn't be an issue but I'd certainly pay attention to people there who have done it before as it -can- be finnicky.. and requires way more patience than I was ever will

many people would consider sp2 just as big a change as a "New OS version". Not new to computers, just never bought into apple's marketing.

Do service packs add features or functionality? Or are they bug fixes? OS X 10.5 added features and functionality to what was available with 10.4. On the other hand every Windows service pack I installed only fixed bugs, they did not add features or functions. Even upgrading Windows 98 to Windows 98 SE was mostly fixing bugs. And I had to pay for the disk I ordered, I couldn't download it.

P.S. From etch to lenny? 100% free and no heart-ache either.

Can I install and run Photoshop CS4 on Jaunty Jackalope? And don't say GIMP is a replacement for PS because it's not. GIMP 2.6 doesn't even edit in 16 bits per colour channel, never mind PS's 24 and 32 bit colour depths. GIMP doesn't separate colours into CYMK either, a plug-in is needed for that. While GIMP is terrific for web work, it does not cut it for professional print photographers. Now CinePaint, formerly known as Film Gimp, has some of these capabilities however it was dropped from the Ubuntu repositories. Now CinePaint is only included in Ubuntu Studio, on which I'll try CinePaint before I fork over money for Photoshop.

Falcon

You're kidding me. You honestly couldn't manage to go to cinepaint's web page and figure out "click the download button, and double click the file that downloads"?

I did that. And when I launched CinePaint after installation all I got was a CinePaint titlebar, nothing else. I tried to open a photo with it, by ctrl clicking the photo and choosing CinePaint in the Open With dialogue. But it did not open.

Of note btw, while cinepaint is shiny (and easy to install), there's actually better software to do that kind of thing on Macs -- pixelmator for example.

Does pixelmator work with at least 16 bit colour channels, depths? I googled it, and oh surprise a license cost $60. Looking at a comparison between it and Photoshop Elements it looks like PE does more, and I got PE with the scanner I bought. However that comparison doesn't say what it's colour depth is, let's look more. Oh, here we go: "It should be noted that 16 bit raw files when saved out are reduced to 8 bits of color depth so using Pixelmator for JPGs would be fine but if you want to shoot raw I suggest using either the pro-level tools or the software that came with the camera." It only saves 8 bit colour channels? Not that good, at least CinePaint saves at least 16 bit depths. Now let me go over to photo.net and see what people there say about it... Not much, out of thousands of posts it's mentioned only 3 tymes though none of them say how well it works. One does say though that "the screenshots for Pixelmator are apparently created in PhotoShop" and provides a link. CinePaint works well enough to use on a number of movies including "Last Samurai", "Harry Potter", and "Lord of the Rings". And you think pixelmator is better?

Falcon

Like which software? 99% of Linux software runs happily on OS X.

I tried to install and use CinePaint and Fink. I was unable to use either one. Sure some get them to work but I'm no genus or hacker. With Ubuntu Studio CinePaint comes with it and I don't need Fink. Or DarwinPorts or MacPorts to install apt-get, .deb, or .rpm packages. I also have Eclipse installed but I get errors when I run it in my user account, then when I try to quit it it won't. Even Force Quit will not stop Eclipse, the only I can kill it is by shutting down though logging out may work, I haven't tried it. Yet I installed the Mac version of it, and it works fine in an admin account but not a user account.

Falcon

I think his point is that MacPorts covers 99% of the Linux/Unix workalike software out there.

MacPorts does not support CinePaint.

Sure there is a lot of Linux only stuff - but typically only because the project is still in alpha and hasn't taken off yet.

I heard about MacPorts 5 years ago. If it's not out of alpha it's never be out of beta.

Given that, the drivers for the hardware on the device are not likley to be supported by Linux for some time after it's release...

I have been investigating installing Ubuntu on my Mac for months. Because CinePaint was dropped from Ubuntu I've been thinking of installing Ubuntu Studio, which does include CinePaint, and I have not found one deal breaker. Ubuntu Forums has a number of posts on how to install Ubuntu on Macs such as this one, "Macbook Pro- Santa Rosa", which is what my Mac's version.

Nothing but ego apparently.

Ego has nothing to do with it. I'd rather try the free CinePaint to edit my photographs than spend several hundred dollars I don't have to buy Photoshop.

Falcon

of OS X:

X11
kde
e17
For everything else there's fink and darwin ports.

I've got X11 installed and tried to install CinePaint and Fink but couldn't get either one to run. I could try MacPorts but it doesn't have CinePaint. So I've been thinking of installing Ubuntu Studio.

Falcon

FOSS can innovate much more than proprietary software because there is no incentive other than to provide a functionality the dev desires.

That's the key, functionality devs want, not end users. Commercial businesses have to provide software end users are willing to pay for but FOSS projects only deliver what the devs want. An excellent example of this is Photoshop vs the GIMP. PS offers 32 bits per colour channel, and print artists need at least 16, whereas GIMP only has 8 bits. They have been promising 16 bits for about 10 years but still have not delivered it. And not because they couldn't, one developers offered them 16 bits but they turned it down. So he forked it and started FilmGIMP, now called CinePaint which offers 32 bits per channel and is used in the movie industry.

Falcon

Examples of stuff that still doesn't work on Kubuntu Jaunty:
...
transcoding in Amarok

I'm no expert and am just going on what I've read but have you tried Ubuntu Studio? It uses the RT kernel which should make Amarok run better.

I've been looking into installing Ubuntu on my Mac, unfortunately one reason I first wanted to was because I wanted to use CinePaint however Ubuntu dropped it. Ubuntu Studio still has it though.

Falcon

Thing is apple laptops are usually pretty good in design, so even OSS people will buy one and then put distro of choice on it, problem? not really. Good hardware is good hardware.

I agree that Apple makes good hardware, and software. However I've been researching on how to install Ubuntu on my MacBook Pro and it's not so simple. Some people have trouble with their keyboards, specific keys such as function keys, or backlighting. Others, with their WiFi, and still others with their net connection.

And the thing is is I wanted to install Ubuntu because I want to use, or try to use, CinePaint. However it was dropped from Ubuntu. While there's a version for OS X I wasn't able to get it working and wasn't able to find out how to googling. Eventually I found out Ubuntu Studio includes CinePaint.

Which brings up a problem many people have with some open source projects. While GIMP is good for average usage or web work. It lacks things pro photographers, which I hope to become, need for print. Such as at least 16 bit colour depths. GIMP has been promising that for more than 10 years. All those years ago the developer of CinePaint, which can work in 32 bits per colour channel, offered his 16 bit work to the GIMP project. But they turned him down so he started his FilmGIMP, now CinePaint, project.

Falcon

Not just requires Leopard - it runs only on Macs with Core 2 (or some Xeon) processors.

Ump, I didn't know that.

That means not only no PPC love, but even the first several Intel Macs are out of luck. Like my wife's 2-year old laptop (only 1 year old or so when they finally released Java 6).

She must of gotten just before Apple released the Core 2 MBP. Perhaps version 2,x. I got mine about 22 months ago, it's a MacBook Pro 3,1.

Perhaps from that link you can tell I have or want to install Ubuntu 9.04 on my MBP. Because it does not include in the install or repositories CinePaint I'm thinking about installing Ubuntu Studio 9.04 which does have CinePaint.

Falcon

It is clear that you are completely unaware of how businesses use and depend on Exchange server's functionality and how the broken and limited functionality of Entourage makes using a Mac a show-stopper for some people.

You're right, I don't get why people won't use standard compliant apps unless the CIO/admin gets a kickback from MS. If I found myself in such a place I'd be concerned about standards compliance and portability. Actually I hope I am in that situation soon, I want to start a photography and design business. I want to sell online as well as IRL.

Now, I need to find a way to install CinePaint in Jaunty Jackalope. If I can't then I'll have buy Photoshop.

Falcon

if OS X would work reasonably on my system, I'd (at least) dual-boot it for sure.

I legally run Leopard, on a MacBook Pro. I've thought about installing Jaunty Jackalope and dualbooting. Unfortunately Ubuntu dropped CinePaint in 8.04 and that's one of the reasons I want to use it. Googling and checking the forums I keep reading about someone getting CinePaint installed so it's usable but I haven't found how they did it.

Apple are really being dumb by sticking with their own hardware

While I'd like to be able to install OS X on any PC I can understand Apple not allowing it. Apple doesn't sell just software, unlike Microsoft who until recently did, they sell the hardware as well. Apple sells compleat systems that "just work". There 's 2 problem with Apple allowing OS X to be installed on any PC. First because Apple wouldn't control the hardware it runs on it couldn't easily prevent OS crashes and Apple would get a blackeye with people complaining OS X wasn't any good. Secondly Apple would see a drop in Mac sells. In the mid 1990s Apple did license Mac clones but when Steve Jobs was brought back in 1996-7 he took one look at the books and saw Apple was loosing money because of the clones. So he ended the program.

However because profit margins are razor thin on hardware maybe Apple could make more money today licensing OS X. A Leopard DVD cost $129 so if Apple's margin on new Macs is less than that then they'd come out ahead. But then again Apple would run into Microsoft, MS wouldn't take kindly to OS X running on any old hardware like Windows does. MS could pull or threaten to pull the Mac version of MS software such as Office. Many businesses wouldn't want to buy Macs if they knew they couldn't run Office, despite peoples' gripes about MS and the existence of office productivity software for Macs including the open source Open Office, many businesses still depend on MS Office.

Falcon

I recently put on Ubuntu 9.0.4 on my wife's computer and it's hands down the best release yet.

I'd like to install Ubuntu on my Mac however one of the reasons for doing so is so I can use CinePaint to edit photos but it was removed from Ubuntu. So now unless I can find a way to install CinePaint in Ubuntu I don't think I'll install it.

However, i'm still in no mans land as My scanner, art pad, and games rely on windows xp

Watcom tablets work on Ubuntu. As do scanners. I have an Epson Perfection V500 scanner others have gotten to work on Ubuntu.

I truly wish Adobe would port over photoshop to Linux.

So do I but people have gotten CS2 to run in CrossOver and CS3 in WINE. Others have gotten CS4 to run in Ubuntu, though not perfectly.

If I can't get CinePaint to install I may end up getting Photoshop myself. I want to try CinePaint first though to see if it will do what I want. If I do get PH I'll probably buy it off eBay where older versions can be bought cheap then upgraded.

Falcon

If a person isn't knowledgeable then they could have someone install a VM, of course it requires knowledge to know about them. That's what I had planned, I'd like to install Ubuntu on my Mac. Then I'd run Ubuntu in a VM on Leopard. I was also looking for a way to run Leopard in a VM on Ubuntu. This would eliminate reboots.

If Windows runs their application du jour and does the rest fairly well

This is why I'm having second thought about installing Ubuntu. One of the reasons I want to is to use CinePaint, however Ubuntu dropped CinePaint. I'll do more research to see if I can get them to work together. If I can find a way I'll install Ubuntu but if not I probably won't.

which it does

I switched from Windows because I was sick and tired of it always crashing. I could have bought a new PC with Vista, it is supposed to be more stable. But I hate Activation, spyware, and being treated like a criminal. Others are sick of them and viruses. I don't buy computers to suffer through crashes, I buy them to use them.

Falcon

Maybe its been a while since you looked at it, according to their page it looks like debian and ubuntu are supported.

CinePaint has not been in Ubuntu since 8.10 intrepid. Search Ubuntu Studio and it returns no results for CinePaint. If CinePaint is part of it why doesn't it return anything? Now the CinePaint website does have a link to a .deb package but Debian has not supported it for years. According to CinePaint "CinePaint was removed from Debian lenny (testing) because Debian has dropped support for GTK1." The Debian people who worked on CinePaint are no longer there. And the .deb available is experimental.

I did my research to see if Ubuntu would do what I wanted.

Falcon

i always install the latest LTS version of ubuntu

I've been wanting to install Ubuntu on my Mac, and almost bought the book "Practical Guide to Ubuntu Linux (Versions 8.10 and 8.04), A (2nd Edition)" last night. Unfortunately one of the reasons I want to install a Linux distro is to run CinePaint but it was dropped from Ubuntu. Unless I can find a way to install CinePaint I don't think I'll install Ubuntu.

Falcon

Compare, Gimp with Photoshop

You should compare CinePaint to Photoshop not GIMP.

Falcon

I know many artists who do most of their work in Photoshop using a Wacom tablet.

I'd like to get a Cintiq but the only thing in my price range right now is a Bamboo. Otherwise I use a trackball instead of a mouse.

I can only direct you to the frequent conversation about 'I need apps that don't work in Linux! You can't use GIMP as a replacement for Photoshop!'.

This is oh so true. However while it may not be a drop-in replacement for Photoshop CinePaint is better than GIMP. One of the problems with it is that many graphic artists and photographers use Macs but there isn't a native Mac port of CinePaint. Instead it requires X11, and even though I have it installed I wasn't able to get CinePaint to work. Also people have gotten CS3 to work on Linux with WINE and CrossOver.

Falcon

I've found the 2.6 builds of GIMP work quite well with Mac (and yes, 24-bit colour has been supported for a long time).

I heard GIMP finally got native Mac support, I wish CinePaint came out with it too. However while GINP does work with 24 bit colour depths it does not edit photos in 16 never mind 24 bits. Currently it shouldn't make much of a difference if the software doesn't work with 16 bits unless a high end digital back is used because most digital cameras only use 12 bits per channel, and a few that use 14 bits. But that's still more than GIMP can reliably work with. For professional print work GIMP doesn't work.

As a matter of interest, what's your problem with X11? It should "just work" once you have installed it off your OS X DVD.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. It's not X I have trouble with, it's CinePaint. When I click on the icon or try to open a photo with CinePaint, by right clicking er ctrl clicking the photo and choosing "open with" it does not display. I get the CinePaint menu on top but that's it. I googled for a tutorial for CinePaint but didn't find one. Heck, CinePaint's online tutorial doesn't go over how to use it.

Falcon

I didn't buy a license. I got legitimate! I moved to GIMP!

I tried GIMP. Even the new 2.6 doesn't work with 16 never mind 24 bit colour depths. However CinePaint can work with 32 bits per colour channel. GIMP doesn't work with CYMK either. Ah apparently there are plugins for CYMK. My problem is that CinePaint requires X11 to run on Macs but I wasn't able to get it to work. So what I want to do is install Ubuntu on my Mac to try CinePaint. I'd like to get a book on it but though there are books for GIMP, one was reviewed on /. a few weeks ago, I haven't found one for CinePaint.

If CinePaint won't do what I want I may end up getting Photoshop CS.

Falcon

Hmmm. I'd have to research a little to answer that accurately.

Thanks.

I DO KNOW that VMWare Fusion will enable you to run Ubuntu as a guest on the Mac host.

Yea, so does Parallels. I was thinking of using VMWare Fusion myself though. However I don't know how to do the opposite, run Leopard in a VM while booted into Ubuntu. I ran across something about it but didn't find it in my bookmarks.

it seems that keeping your Mac as the host OS might be wiser.

I could probably get away with just running Ubuntu in VM while booted into Leopard and not need to run Leopard while booted into Ubuntu. Two reason I've been thinking of doing it is to run CinePaint in Ubuntu and to test programs and scripts in both.

Good luck!

Thanks!

Falcon

See, this is where the fanboys fall down frothing at the mouth. For starters, I have to be able to use Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign.

No, I think this is fanboyism. Though not everyone can, many people are able to use GIMP or CinePaint to replace Photoshop. Actually when I've said before that GIMP was not a drop-in replacement for Photoshop I've gotten a bunch of replies just as sarcastic as yours. I've been wanting to start a photography business and I will try CinePaint to see if it will work for me before I spend money on Photoshop. Actually I did try it on my Mac however the Mac version is not native instead it requires X11 and I wasn't able to get it to work. So I may install Ubuntu on my Mac so I can test CinePaint. For Illustrator I'll try Inkscape first. If I wanted to do desktop publishing, I have no plan to, I'd try Scribus before I got InDesign.

No it may end up I need CS4 because they won't work for me but they do work for plenty of others and I am willing to try this.

Now, I have to use those because all my peers throughout the industry are going to be using those same exact tools.

Peer pressure is no reason you have to use them. Open source software can save in the same file formats and are capable of some of the same things, even if differently, as Adobe products in many cases.

When a firm hires me to do work for them, they expect me to be able to use the defacto tools for the trade.

And you want to work for them? It shouldn't matter to clients what you use as long as you do the job in the tyme specified.

Next up, games.

I don't play games but if I ever do I can go to Yahoo! Games. I did buy some game CDs but that was before 2000.

Development. Sorry, no substitute for XCode on Linux.

I have yet to use XCode on my Mac though I do use Eclipse which is cross platform. Now if I ever try Objective-C I may try XCode but I'd rather program in C/C++. If you look at this thread I do ask another programmer about whether Objective-C is cross platform.

If I'm writing apps for OS X or the iPhone, guess what?, you need OS X and an iPhone simulator.

I don't disagree but as may be concluded from above I want to program cross platform, Linux, OS X, and Windows.

You substitute cranks are all the same. You see some one complain about Linux not having the par software, and hold up a supposed equivalent which (most of the time) not only pales in comparison, but is outright inferior to the defacto standard tool.

And fanboys are all the same, they cry an open source alternative won't work but they fail to try or to say why. If this isn't you, explain exactly why these alternatives will not work.

Falcon

I've got CS4 running in WINE

I'd like to get CS4 but before I spend the money on it I want to try CinePaint first. Since I didn't get the Mac version, which requires X11 and isn't a native Mac port, to work I'm thinking of installing Ubuntu on my Mac so I can try it out. I'd also like a book on it but I haven't found one. Googling for tutorials doesn't produce any tutorials on using CinePaint, something like half of the webpages I visited were on GIMP.

I've got XP in a VirtualBox VM

If I install Ubuntu on my Mac it will be as a dualboot system. I'll then install VM software in both Leopard and Ubuntu so I can run one OS when I boot into the other. I know Parallels and VMWare can do this, but I don't know if VirtualBox can. I read it was planned but not ready yet.

Falcon

BTW, you know that GIMP's "niche printing issues" would almost never bother a photographer, right?

Other than GIMP not being capable of more than 8 bits per colour channel, I don't know or recall about GIMP's "niche printing issues".

I really want to try CinePaint but I haven't found an online tutorial on using it, even CinePaint's online tutorial does not say how to use it. And unlike GIMP for which there are books, including the one being reviewed here, I haven't been able to find one for CinePaint. If you search Amazon books you get some results for it but they are about Linux and only mention CinePaint. Bookpool shows none. Searching Google for cinepiant books shows books on GIMP but not CinePaint.

Falcon

BTW, you know that GIMP's "niche printing issues" would almost never bother a photographer, right?

Other than GIMP not being capable of more than 8 bits per colour channel, I don't know or recall about GIMP's "niche printing issues".

I really want to try CinePaint but I haven't found an online tutorial on using it, even CinePaint's online tutorial does not say how to use it. And unlike GIMP for which there are books, including the one being reviewed here, I haven't been able to find one for CinePaint. If you search Amazon books you get some results for it but they are about Linux and only mention CinePaint. Bookpool shows none. Searching Google for cinepiant books shows books on GIMP but not CinePaint.

Falcon

Steam games

Okay, games are a weakness for Macs though there are a lot that run on them. What I find ironic is that I run into people who think Macs are only good for games.

Decent Amateur radio software and no, the software listed on http://www.machamradio.com/ is not good enough.

What about the DXZone? Things may of changed since then but years ago I knew hams who swore by Macs. I wanted to get my license myself but I had a hard tyme with Morse Code.

x11 that supports drag and drop properly, so I can use x11 applications as they should be used.

I've tried two X11 apps, CinePaint and Fink or MacPorts but I couldn't get either one to work. I may install Ubuntu on my Mac, in which case I can run CinePaint in it and use Synaptic as well as other methods to install software.

Have you checked out CNR, ClickNRun?

Stuff like fink, macports which isn't hopelessly broken

Did you try both at the same tyme? I read where you should use one OR the other as they don't play well together.

Falcon

It's not as simple as ditching Windows and using Linux for a lot of people. I switched from Windows to both Linux and OS X. My desktop PC, under desk tower really, came with Linux installed. And my laptop is a MacBook Pro, MBP. I rarely use the Linux PC. It came with only a 40 GB HDD so I added a 750 GB HDD as a second one. I used it for user files. But then the motherboard failed and since it was still under warranty where I bought it replaced the mobo. Then they had to reinstall Linux, before they did I gave them written instructions not to format the large drive but to set it for user files. The person who reinstalled Linux put it on autopilot and the drive was formatted anyway, so before I use it I want to recover the files I had. Which come to about 500GB.

Anyway, I want to start a photography business. For print GIMP just does not cut it so I may install Ubuntu on my MBP and try CinePaint to see if it will work for me. If not then I'll have to get Photoshop, which isn't easy to get working on Linux.

I think GIMP 2.6 added it but older versions do not offer it. Without these two capabilities, which are important for many pros, pros have little reason to use GIMP.

On the other hand CinePaint does do them. However many graphics/photography pros use Macs and CinePaint doesn't work well in OS X.

You seem to be mistakenly conflating professional graphic design with print design - there's this new media called "the web", you may have heard of it, it works on RGB and so CMYK capabilities aren't that important.

To be honest, I run a small business and GIMP/Inkscape (without colour profiles) work fine for our print advertising. PS would provide no ROI for us - mainly because customers couldn't care less if ads are using Pantone spot colours or not and partly because we use small print runs on digital presses where precise colour match is deprecated in favour of financial value.

Yes if you're doing solely graphic design, or working for print (in a quality critical sector) then CS4 or CorelX4 is essential.

I used GIMP when I really wanted to move entirely to Ubuntu. But points 1, 2 and 6 broke GIMP for me. I hate sticking to XP just so I can have PS, but that's the price I have to pay to have proper photo editing.

If you're using Ubuntu have you tried CinePaint? I don't know if it meets your requirements but it may.

Falcon

he day Adobe puts CS on Linux is the day GIMP gets a stake driven through its heart. Ad that day can't come too soon, IMHO. I'd love to run CS on a Linux box and be done with Mac AND Windows and run on generic hardware.

Thanks to a how-to posted yesterday, here's a guide to Installing Photoshop on Ubuntu Linux. However it's for PS 7. Though they can be made to run there are issues with CS.

I'll definitely buy this book. I dislike GIMP intensely, but knowing it better might take an edge off.

I won't buy this book as is but if it was about using CinePaint I'd jump on it.

Falcon

It's really interesting how professionals pretty much ignore the GIMP in favor of Photoshop.

One reason is because GIMP does not do 16 never mind 24 or 32 bits per colour channel. While GIMP's 8 bits per channel works for the web it does not cut it for print. CYMK, cyan, yellow, magenta, and black, output is also needed for print. I think GIMP 2.6 added it but older versions do not offer it. Without these two capabilities, which are important for many pros, pros have little reason to use GIMP.

On the other hand CinePaint does do them. However many graphics/photography pros use Macs and CinePaint doesn't work well in OS X.

Falcon

And GIMP may never do 16 bit colour channels. It's been almost 10 years since a developer added 16 bit depth per colour channel. But the maintainers of GIMP did not add this capability, so the developer forked it and started Film GIMP now called CinePaint.

If it could do both of these it would meet all my professional needs.

Have you tried CinePaint? I'm using Mac OS X now and though there's a version of CinePaint for OS X it's not native and needs X11. Unfortunately I haven't been able to get CinePaint to work so I've been thinking of installing Ubuntu, when the new long term support version comes out, on my Mac. If I do I'll be able to try and see if it will work for me, I want to get into photography. If it works it will save me money but if not then I may end up paying for Photoshop.

So where's the drop-in replacement for Photoshop? Sure some may be able to get by using GIMP but if you're a pro photographer who does print media then GIMP does not cut it.

This is kind of missing the point... There have been other replies that echoed what you just stated. Sure, there are some things that the GIMP doesn't do that Photoshop does. Just as there are some things that Oracle does that MySQL/PostgreSQL don't, etc. etc.

And your reply kind of misses my point, which is there's places and uses for both open source and closed source proprietary software. While there are areas where open source fills a need quite well, closed source does as well. Photoshop is one of those closed source programs. I'd love an open source program that could replace PS but GIMP isn't there. Now before I buy PS it, I've been thinking about installing Ubuntu on my Mac to try out CinePaint and see if it can do what I'll want to do. There is a version of CinePaint for OS X but it is not a native Mac app, instead it requires X11 and though I installed both I wasn't able to get CinePaint to run. Unfortunately I wasn't able to find a tutorial or book on it either.

One doesn't have to look much further than Sun to see how OSS has demolished a once-mighty giant.

I don't doubt FOOS can and does eat into proprietary closed source software venders. But that's good for a free market. Competition pushes businesses to innovate or make a better product. Microsoft is a prime example. Besides Apple and Linux pushing MS to improving Windows, look at Internet Explorer. Once IE overtook Netscape in browsers used MS basically stopped improving and making IE standards compliant. It was only after Netscape was open sourced and Firefox, which I've been using for years, started growing did MS start improving IE. IE 5 came out on March 18, 1999 and IE 6 on August 27, 2001, about 2 1/2 years later. IE 7 though took 5 years for MS to release it after IE 6, it was released on October 18, 2006. In "August 2007 at the latest. On March 5, 2008, the first public beta (Beta 1) was released to the general public". I doubt if IE 8 have happened so fast if not for the competition from Google's Chrome, Firefox, and Apple's Safari.

... decided if I'm going to put the tyme and effort into programming my own software it may be worthwhile to sell what I come up with to others.

As a service or as binaries? Just worth pointing out that you don't have to give away your source code if you're not distributing anything.

As I don't want to start a software business I'd sale it as a binary. Selling a service would mean I'd have to provide a service which would take away tyme I could be taking photographs instead.

A common misconception about the GPL is that it somehow compels developers who incorporate any GPL-licensed code into always giving away their code. The only time that comes into play is when you distribute the code.

And if I try to sell it I will be distributing it. Sure I wouldn't have to sell it but if I'm going to put the effort into programming I'd like to be able to make more money off of it. There's just no way I could compeat with the commercial venders who sell to pro photographers using the GPL. Thinking of it this way may help, being able to sell software I program could make it worthwhile to take the tyme to program.

Falcon