Slashdot Mirror
Photoshop in Linux Thanks to Disney
miladus writes "eWeek
reports that Walt Disney's feature animation unit (along with 2 other
unnamed studios) are using Adobe's Photoshop in Linux. They use the Wine emulator
to run the software and the 3 studios 'not known as team players, all
three agreed that a project that would benefit the entire open-source
community while delivering a technology they needed--was worth their cooperation'."
I just remembered reading this article in Linux Journal about Dreamworks running Photoshop via VMWare.
Unique signatures are rare.
Haha, yes!
I can feel the slashdotters' brains explode with conflict.
Slashdotter are stupid and biased.
to run photoshop. Was this not previously possible?
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
Why does it takes an EVIL company to do the right thing????
....so how long before we start seeing Tux cameos in Disney toons?
"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
I have not used it in a few years. It did not work too well except for Notepad and Paint at that time. Is it any better now?
I wonder if/when Apple will release a powerful yet easy to use image editor to compete with Photoshop. I'd like to see what they can do, as I think Photoshop's UI "is the sux", as the kids say.
What about speed issues? Isn't photoshop+wine a lot slower than running it in native win32? I can hardly run mirc with wine on a 1ghz computer (only a test, I don't really use mirc ;)
Why dont they just use Windows? It would be much faster and crash less. *shrug*
Has anyone got it working?
I think it would benefit the graphics designers if Photoshop for Linux was made Open Source. The Open Source developer community would be able to enhance the offerings of the Adobe Team by adding new Gaussian blur filters, better fill methodologies, and Ogg Vorbis export functionality.
The Linux platforms is an untapped market for Adobe and by making Photoshop Open Source, not only would the community forgive them for the ElcomSoft lawsuit but would also create a new revenue stream by offering support and consulting for Linux adopters.
Only when we free the works of Milne from the clutches of depraved millionaires will we be able to entertain our children.
Which is nice.
Wearing pants should always be optional.
why would they do this ?, surely if you can afford 700$ for photoshop (plus the oodles of ram/cpu it wants), 99$ for a copy of Windows XP is small change especially since the stability benefits of running dedicated Win compiled code rather than emulating it would be outweigh the cost. seems this is more of a experiment than a serious buisness strategy.
Now if we could persuade PS to be native on linux we would be getting somewhere, until then ill stick with XP and PS on my x86 and my Mac wont be going anywhere soon
has anyone actually tried to run ps on linux? How does the performance measure up to say a mac or windose box? I would also like to see Adobe golive run nicely on linux too. Maybe adobe will notice the need for its apps on linux and start porting them.
_+_+__+_+_+_+_+_+_+++
when i moo u moo - just like that
This is definately a big step in the right direction. Once major apps can run well under Linux, more users will be able to fully adopt it as a primary OS.
DeviantArt Page
NSFWThis is a major improvement for Linux. I know of many people who dont use Linux because of Photoshop.
I hope other companies do the same thing Disney did, with other poducts. It would bw a great boost to Linux on the desktop.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Photoshop is probably one of the things that kept Apple going in the dark times. With Photoshop working on Linux there is little reason for a lot of people to stay with windows. This won't make anyone suddenly aware of Linux, but that's because most graphic designers are smart enough to be able to weigh their options. This is why Apple has such a large market share in the design world compared to the consumer world. This probably won't be the killer app for Linux, but it's a VERY big step in the right direction.
Help I'm a rock.
But we still hate 'em right?
Everybody has a purpose in life, maybe mine is to lurk in slashdot.
Stick with Windows, and drop that whine crap!!!
Disney helps Linux, so Disney is not Evil ??
Obviously they're doing this because it makes business sense, but does it make performance sense? Does the added overhead from Wine actually make it faster than running Windows? Can Wine work with OpenMosix/other clusters? I'm sure they can afford the computers to handle this, but it seems kinda crazy if there's no real benefit. Yes, I know that OSS and FS have advantages, but is Disney actually seeing that? If so, good for them. Otherwise, why?
If would be nice if Adobe ported a native version of Photoshop. Of course, I tend to doubt that they'd go open source on the release. :^)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
The article mentions that Disney has contributed the enhancements back to the community. So unless we want to pay $60 for Crossover Office, where do we get our hands on the source code?
Anyone got a link?
So does this mean that Photoshop will now work in the current version of Wine? The article doesn't make it clear..
I seem to recall hearing about running PS under WINE not that long ago. What I'm wondering is why a large company like Disney can't pressure Adobe into making a native port. Seems like their money would be in the bag if they did since lots of people have been asking for PS on Linux.
Come on Adobe, not all of us Linux people are cheap, release PS for Linux.
The Anti-Blog
No you shouldn't. I'm not trying to start some Photoshop-Gimp flamewar.
If Gimp was working satisfactory for you until now, then you don't need CMYK. Which is the only fine line difference between them, and user interface, yes.
I really need only RGB and pictures are not that big. During my tests Gimp proved to be more usable than Photoshop in my range of usage. But there's a clear line, printing professional usage can't include use of Gimp, except in some small cases where illustrations come in question.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
The best part of the GIMP is that it is free. For those of us on Windows, the idea of using Photoshop on Linux is cool, but I'd still have to pay for it. Until then, the GIMP is my tool of choice.
I bought it for the Mac instead.
Wine Is Not an Emulator!!!
HA! Right. And I bet you believe that GNU is not UNIX either.
Fin411...w3 c4n g37 7h3 3vi1 p0r1 0ff 0f 7h3 wind0ws b0x3s!!
Surely that should be a Lin-Lin model? oh, ho ho. Jeez, I crack myself up.
See Crossover Office, which is based on Wine, to run Photoshop, Internet Explorer, MS Office and a number of other big-name Windows applications in Linux.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
I'm glad to see this sort of thing happening, but I am a little disappointed that Adobe didn't port its code to linux natively.
Using Wine will nodoubtedly help many companies using linux. And it will make the decision easier for many companies that want to use linux, but are worried about compatability issues.
My hope is that Win will carry us through the transition phase until software manufacturers just compile a linux version of their product.
The problem now is that companies won't switch to linux because their aren't enough programs supported on linux. But software companies won't develop linux products because there aren't enough companies using linux. It's a deadlock. But if Wine can make the first crack in the floodgates, the whole thing should crumble. If there are already a bunch of photoshop users running linux-wine, Adobe is much more likely to issue a linux port of their code. Which in turn makes it easier to go linux with your company!
And soon enough, all the software companies will compile their linux distrubutions, and then, if enough people ask for it, alter the code so it can be compiled for Windows.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
What's cheaper than free???
It's not that surprising for movie makers to cooperate. Yes, if there's one really good movie, it will probably tend to take away from the sales of another movie, but people don't simply substitute one movie for another. If there are two good movies out, people will watch both instead of just choosing one. Good movies that are cheap to make benefits the film industry as a whole.
May we never see th
You could just use Windows or Mac. You know, operating systems the software was written for... :(
Disney is using this opportunity to market Micky Mouse over the infamous linux penguin.
I don't get where their numbers are coming from.
Apparently Photoshop on Windows costs $50K+$40K support == $90K
Photoshop on linux costs $15K.
Last I checked, Photoshop was around $600 per workstation. XP Pro is $200/station, and I think licenses for NT/2K/2K3 server are around $100/seat. So really, Windows ended up being the cheaper part of of the equation, at $300 per station.
Support? How is it that Windows support is $40K/yr but linux support is free? There's just as much free Windows support out there as linux.
I applaud the effort to move off Windows, and I'm glad to see that WINE is of this caliber quality, but don't justify your switch with a bunch of nonsense numbers.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
Okay. I get it. The penguin makes movies for a mouse because the rats (read lawyers)have approved it? Ohhhhhhh...... That explains why the best Disney animated movies do not come from Disney. They're using lawyers in their animation department.
This passes for news?! I've been running PhotoShop 7 under wine for the past year. I didn't have to do anything special (although I do have Crossover). Should we congratulate these geniuses for logging in to their linux systems too? Way to go guys! Keep up the good work!!
Everyone is using Microsoft Photo Editor anyway.
The article mentions a little bit more than just running Photoshop with WINE. It talks about Disney moving it's animation workstations from an SGI platform to Linux.
Does Photoshop even have a IRIX version?
Disnix. It takes the best from Yellow Dog (Old Yeller), Tux gets mouse ears, and the man pages have been dumbed-down and are narrated by Roger Rabbit.
Alright, I'll stop.
.sig
It figures that there had to be a balance for Disney's evil [ ;) ] support of the MPAA...
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
Crossover Office 2.0 has official support for Adobe Photoshop.
I installed PS 7 on my P4 2.4Ghz and is ran quite nicely. It's amazing how far Wine has come.
"I filter at +6, and have yet to miss out on an important comment." (#822545)
I find that wine helps me use a lot of Linux applications too. In fact, I have to be flat out drunk before I'll even start Emacs.
[Yikes - who threw that?!]
On a related note, I'm still kind of surprised that Adobe wouldn't port Photoshop over to Linux even for a company with as much clout as Disney. Seriously, I realize it's a LOT of work to port an app that massive, but if basically every animator who runs linux wants it, why not? Catering to your customers is definitely part of a good business model. Since Adobe's management switched over not too far back though, I think some of the crazy innovations might be slower-coming these days. Guess that's what happens when you replace someone with vision (Adobe founder) with a Marketing drone (current CEO, IIRC).
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
Disney Is Not an Open Source Advocate Unless Required.
Since Disney is involved with Linux, I can tell her that those bastards at SCO are trying to find Nemo too... So they can sue him.
That's scary.
See this is why most application companies DON'T want to have anything to do with Linux. The second they touch it, the community starts yelling "Open Source it", "Boycott it, it's binary only!", "They're violating the GPL!", etc. etc. :/ Some thanks... (Well that and the insanely small desktop market share)
I'm sorry, but Linux needs photoshop. That is one of those programs that some people actually earn their living using. The GIMP is nothing compared to photoshop. It may work for amateurs, but even people who use it as a major hobby could not get the same results with GIMP.
Slashdotter are stupid and biased.
Why can't you just be the evil company that you're supposed to be?!
ARGH!!!
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
I've done it, the latest CSOffice supports Photoshop 7. For me, it seems to run at about 1/2 to 3/4 speed, depending on what you do.
Photos.
I have Photoshop 7 running with CrossOver office on a AthonXP 2800+ and Gentoo, runs like a dream. Its actually never crashed and even the auto online update thingy works. Speed wise, the app feels like your running Redhat. Sometimes things take a second to draw and mouse events are slower than normal. You also cannot resize the toolbar thing, thats ok though.
If the same license fees are paid to Adobe for photoshop no matter if you run on Windows or Linxu where is the huge savings? Did MS change the fees fo desktop windows as of late4 without telling us?
Don't Tread on OpenSource
why dont they just use the gimp
lose != loose
I'm confused... I thought I was supposed to hate Disney. Have the slashgods turned they back on me, again!?
SCO is still bad right?
Can anyone whose done real work with Photoshop-on-WINE comment on how they deal with display calibration and colorspace issues? How do you make sure what you see on your linux box is what you get from your film printer?
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
The counter-intuitive UI of Gimp is enough reason to ditch it. Add the fact that the plugins from Alien Skin are sw33t and not duplicated in any satisfactory way in Gimp and you have two good reasons why you would want to use Photoshop over it.
Yeah, but GIMP sucks to use when you compare it side-by-side with Photoshop. Sure it can do a lot of the same things, and suffices for most Unix users when there is no better alternative. It still clunks like a square-wheeled rickshaw.
It's true; I could typeset my documents with Emacs and LaTeX. That fact doesn't stop me from using Word though.
Wine Is Not an Emulator!!!
Gee, why would people think it's an emulator? Don't get too upset, but it is an emulator in many senses of the word (Yes, I know WINE is an acronymn for Wine Is Not an Emulator).
- It just happens to implement a similar look and feel as Win
- It implements the Windows API on a non Windows system
- I can use it to execute the same Windows programs and achieve the same results as with MS Windows, which fits the the dictionary definition
- Oh, and it ends in 'E'. What does that stand for? Ethereal?
And GNU is Un*x.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
If you read the sidebar in the article, you'll notice that the "open-source" solution was:
"Solution: With two other animation studios, fund CodeWeavers' development of a plug-in that ports Photoshop to Linux"
So shelling out for Code Weavers is exactly what you'll have to do. Unless of course, the solution actually does "port photoshop to linux." In which case they're saying you can now run photoshop natively, without wine.
Take Care
A1miras
What *really* needs to happen is for Adobe to simply support linux itself. They should be flattered that other companies are using it's software on platforms it supports. I'm not saying make it opensource, it's a bad business model. But they should release a suite of linux binaries and plugins. It isn't all that hard, and there are tons of developers out there that can help (and be employed).
The only person(s) who disagree live mostly in Redmond, WA. And it's not like listen to them. What I'm saying is, if businesses find out that people are emulating they're software, they aren't working hard enough, and they're actually losing out. In a perfect world, there would be no need for emulators.
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
That's great. As much as I love the gimp and all of it's gtk goodness. As a graphic designer it really isn't quite good enough. Bummer it has to run in wine. I hope this shows adobe the interest to have their tools run in linux.
I hope macromedia gets hip to linux as well.. I could have illistrator, photoshop, and flash, I'd be one happy camper!
-makoffee
Getting popular applications like this running on Linux is the single most important thing to get Linux on the desktop.
Note that Adobe could probably release a native version of Photoshop to run on Linux fairly easily. They had a Unix version, and also of course it will run on OSX, so going native to Linux can't be that big an issue.
Everyone who wants to see Linux on the desktop should be pestering the companies of the software they use to release a Linux version. For me, the important one is Macromedia Flash, so I've been emailing Macromedia asking when they are going to port it. If you want to see Linux on the desktop, start pestering!
Where are the code or binaries of their wine for photoshop? I want this and need this.
Sig removed because it was obnoxious
They save a bundle of $$$ by having the software on the same platform as they're using for rendering the movies. (yes, Disney renders their movies on a huge Linux cluster)
thanks.
Just so everyone knows....Fritz "Disney" Hollings is retiring in 2004!!!
na na na na....na na na na....hey hey hey....good bye!!!
na na na na....na na na na....hey hey hey....good bye!!!
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
thank you.
What would be really great news is that there was a native *nix version again. ( there was one for SGI long ago.. so they cant claim it cant be done ).
While using it in wine may be nice, and shows wine is improving, ( hats off to their team ) it really doesn't mean THAT much in the grand scheme of things.... we don't want to be relegated to just be an 'emulator' ( yes i know its not 100% accurate to say emulation, but you get the point so its close enough )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I've used PS7 with Crossover Office before (about three months ago)... it ran very smooth, and very fast! I couldn't tell the difference between on Linux and on XP, except that in XP the widgets look a little sleeker for some reason. I can now finally do quality photo maniulation without banging my head against the wall in Linux ;) I highly recommend Crossover, it's a great product.
You may be happy hearing that GIMP is slowly starting to support CMYK
- Added naive RGB CMYK conversion routines [Sven]
- Generalized paint tools [Mitch]
:wq
A professional artist said "Photoshop has performed well on Red Hat, Brooks said. Saving files is faster on Linux than on Mac OS machines also running Photoshop, he said." ....and then the mac user said something about "YEAH, but it's better for graphics".. and I had to completely ignore him :)
-I DDoSed your mom.
I've been using Photoshop since the 2.5 days (pre layers -- when real men [and women] used alpha channels) on Macs. I then switched over to using pshop on the PC because, well, I couldn't afford a mac!
But then, something strange happened. I had been using Linux (Redhat) as my OS-of-choice at home and would switch to my laptop (running 2k) to do Photoshop work. Out of the desire to use my mouse, I went and sunk a few bucks and bought the crossover application (commercial version of wine) and whalla! Photoshop 6 runs on my linux box, and faster!
So, now I can use Photoshop with my mouse (instead of that annoying touch-pad). The only thing that is a little annoying is that the focus of the tool bar and the other pallets take away from the canvas, so if you click on the marquee tool, you have to "double click" on the canvas to get the focus where you need it. Not a big deal, just a "thing."
sad robot making broken music
thanks in advance
> Brooks said it took some time to convince Disney attorneys that he wanted to pay for the development of the porting solution but did not want to own it. However, Disney's legal department has developed a policy that enables Disney to protect its intellectual property while keeping within the statutes of the GNU General Public License, he said.
Does anybody know that the problem was?
--
I refuse to use
The line is: "Because Good is dumb" ;-)
Spaceballs, the movie.
The world is a comedy to those who think and a tragedy to those who feel.
Err... "not exactly like Photoshop" and "counterintuitive" aren't synonymous, you know.
I suppose you emerged from your mother's womb knowing how to use Photoshop?
Troll.
In other words, Gimp is tree friendly.
Why not put the same amount of money and effort into training for the GIMP. It is just as powerful (arguably more powerful) and runs natively on linux. That would have saved them closer to .25 million - training expenses. for a net savings of over 200000 dollars (assuming photoshop is $600 and Windows $200)
They could pay some GNU developers to reverse engineer the animation related plugins for some added bang.
l8,
AC
Sure the Gimp is a good FREE choice but I don't think it compares to Photoshop. I've used both and Photoshop is my pick, hands down.
they use the Wine emulator
I thought wine was NOT an emulator?
Codeweaver's Crossover Office supports Photoshop, says the article. This version of wine (sort of like Transgaming's, but..) is costing money (something like $60 a copy, IIRC), rather than being free. :/ This would completely free me from the tyrrany of Windows.. If only I had Exchange.
Give him a fresh juicy apple, and he complains that you should have instead figured out how to make the worm in the last apple tastier.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
that's all
I used to use Photoshop, and then I switched to Corel Photo-Paint. I had used the gimp off and on just for experimentation, but never seriously. A few versions later, and now I use nothing else. I do not miss photoshop, and I doubt I ever will.
Admit it -- you just wanted to say "fungible".
... but you can't deny the thrill of extreme vocabulary ....
Granted, it's the right word for the context
-kgj
If you are a graphics illustrator, you don't use The Gimp. You use Photoshop. It is the standard. I don't have a problem with that, but I use The Gimp. I don't do professional work, although The Gimp is pretty darn impressive. It is OK if they both exist, and one is free and the other makes you auction body parts on eBay. (unless you have acquired a copy by other means, which I won't address). If you really NEED Photoshop, then buy it. If you just want a great image editing program, then use Gimp. I know a lot of people have Photoshop simply because it is expensive, and they like to think they have expensive things. But The Gimp will suit 90% of the people who need to edit images.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Added naive RGB CMYK conversion routines [Sven]
This will go nicely with their naive user interface.
Shouldn't Adobe take the hint and port the damn software?
Yeah, but "Gimp's UI" and "counterintuitive" are...
-- Jack
Um the only reason why Adobe hasn't ported Photoshop to Linux is that there aren't enough Linux using designers who could pay for it.
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Disney has already support for Linux, since they're big on Linux. Microsoft is an extra cost... which they can get rid off by making this move.
Perhaps others don't read the numbers like Satan reads the bible...
CMYK is important yes, but photoshop has numerous features that the gimp doesn't have yet. Image Variations, pantone colors, vectors (yes adobe photoshop has limited vector support) a MUCH better way of handling type (the gimp is truly moronic at handling text) better painting tools (have you seen the entire revamped brush system in photoshop 7, amazing) along with better graphics tablet support. And I have not even come close to covering it all. And even after spending 2 hours trying to get used to gimps interface, it was very counterintuitive. Whoever made all the dialogs is a moron, unless you memorize every keystroke, all actions take 2 to 3 more clicks on average.
Oh yeah, my biggest pet peeve, when you dynamically transform a selected area that stupid grid pops up instead of a more interactive live preview transform. I wish the gimp developers the best, but the gimp is years behind photoshop.
Photos.
I'd give you points if I had them...
......
Of those to whom much is given, much is required.
Although Brooks considered and even tried to use several open-source alternatives, including GIMP, or GNU Image Manipulation Program (see related story), and Cinepaint (formerly FilmGimp), he said he ran into performance issues with the two programs. Artists also found the open-source programs less intuitive to use than Photoshop.
On the whole I still believe that this is a major win for the Open Source community, and for the Linux and Wine projects in particular, but the above text did leave me pondering. It looks like Linux is getting fairly established as a stable OS, and also as a viable alternative to Microsoft's OSs', but until we have viable replacements to programs in the user space, a part of any Linux adoption policy will always be hostage to Microsoft and its tactics.All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
Speaking of disney, I heard a report on NPR that Fritz Hollings, often refered to as the senator from Disney and sponser of such wonders of legislation as the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), will not be running for re-election.
Article in the hollywood reporter (First link on new.google.com I found.
I'll be quite pleased to see him go, even though it may give the Republicans a bigger lead in the house. Probably the lesser of two evils.
Not such a crazy idea, Disney (well go.com) allowed the release of Tea, a Java servlet-based scripting language which is a cracking piece of work, coming as it does with great manuals, an IDE with some really smart auto-completion, and providing a statically type, fully compiled web programming environment. We used it on an eCommerce site to great effect, though I'm not sure how much development it's going through these days.
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
(offtopic--if this doesn't interest you, move along...)
You know, that's pretty cool, but what I'd really like to see is transparent windows with opaque text and other foreground elements. For instance, I think you'll find the shell in that screenshot there would be a little more legible if the text were opaque white instead of translucent.
You mention on your webpage window transparency is a feature of 2000/XP. I don't know anything about those OSes, but I'm just curious--is it possible using the system window manager to make the text opaque and keep the background transparent?
yours
What about other applications like DragonDictate? In light of this article, voice dictation is the ONLY thing keeping me from converting to Linux.
Laws are for people with no friends.
In short: Disney is one of the strong supporters of the MPAAA and backs (with money) any attempt to exert control of the Internet, with the obvious goal of making it work like subscription TV.
For a pile of examples, plug disney mpaa 2600 into a search engine and read a pile of articles laced with quotes that show a sickening contempt for anyone understands or enjoys freedom.
At some point a successful company has to choose between maximum profits and moral behavior, Disney has chosen poorly.
Yeah, Linux is real intuitive. Why should the GIMP be any different?
It's open source. Write an intuitive UI for it, and contribute!
You would rather use word than Emacs + LaTeX?!
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
If you are a graphics illustrator, you don't use The Gimp.
Thanks for letting me know what I like, didn't know that until you told me.
You use Photoshop. It is the standard
Wake up and smell the coffe. Since when is photoshop illustration standard. It's a prepress standard.
other makes you auction body parts on eBay. (unless you have acquired a copy by other means, which I won't address). If you really NEED Photoshop, then buy it
Thanks I bought two MacOS design collections, for that little PREPRESS WORK I need. I bought them for my two G4s which I really dislike infact hate, and one PC Design COllection which I'm currently testing under wine for a month or so
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
Time to learn and understand what emulation is... To a person who actually knows something about emulation, it is the imitation of hardware in software. Wine does not do this. Wine doesn't pretend to be an x86 (or any other) processor like Bochs does. What Wine DOES do, is present an imitation of the SOFTWARE calls that the Windows API presents. This allows the software to run very quickly since no CPU cycles are wasted while pretending to be a different processor.
:)
That is why an Amiga emulator like UAE *IS* and emulator. It's pretending to be a Motorola 68x00 processor. This is why NESTicle is an emulator, it's pretending to be a 16 bit NES console. This is why DOSBox is an emulator. It's pretending to be an x86 processor and associated hardware with an implementation of DOS running on it. And all of these emulators have a performance hit since they have to pretned to be some other hardware AND allow an executable to run on that emulated hardware.
Again... WINE doesn't do this. So Wine Is Not an Emulator.
God I love feeding the trolls.
Un-news
Gates can't even coerce his movie mogul partners (even with his power to give the crap away for free) to use Windows on their desktops.
It must suck to be him right now.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
So you do this for a living... let's see, spending a few hundred bucks up front, verses several extra clicks for each and every manipulation you do for 8 hours a day for the next couple years. Hrmmm, not exactly a rough choice is it?
It's true; I could typeset my documents with Emacs and LaTeX. That fact doesn't stop me from using Word though.
Actually, I much prefer vim and LaTeX. Word doesn't do typesetting btw, you'd be better off using Adobe InDesign/FrameMaker, quark xpress or even Microsoft Publisher(!)(an almost forgotten product, but even the windows 3.1 version was a whole lot better at typesetting than word is).
Word's market isn't typesetting (or even DTP) or complicated document management; it's general use word processing. You shouldn't compare it to LaTeX, but to OpenOffice for example. And ooO certainly does have clunky-UI issues!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
>> I can finally dump Gimp!
Perhaps if you can afford the copy of PhotoShop or have a business reason.
Gimp however will remain popular with those as myself who have no business need for PhotoShop and can't afford the $$$ for it.
Yeah, but GIMP sucks to use when you compare it side-by-side with Photoshop. Sure it can do a lot of the same things, and suffices for most Unix users when there is no better alternative. It still clunks like a square-wheeled rickshaw.
In some other ways Photoshop sucks. I think that sooner or later you'll realize what my post said. Let me explain you in more simple logic. Sometimes you don't need a truck to move one brick. Use the right tool.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
I wonder if WINE will run AutoCAD at some point in the future? That's the only app I need to run in Windows, and I can't do without it.
if you're doing professional typesetting with Microsoft Word... well... your typesetting days are numbered.
Disney using open-source? Pfft... I'll believe it when penguins fly!
My understanding is that Disney is also responsible for the TEA templating system used by ESPN, go.com and a few other big Disney owned sites. They've stop hosting the project pages and the new pages can be found at:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/teatrove/
"Tea is a simple, powerful, compiled, high-performance, content creating template language that elegantly separates application logic from layout. The TeaServlet makes Tea development easy, by linking into a servlet container."
Comprehensive kitchen-sink solutions like Photoshop will be hard to replace. With 10+ years of development history behind it, and an all-encompassing feature set that makes it useful to everyone from professional photographers to astronomers, Photoshop has created a legacy that's hard to displace.
When an app gets sufficiently complex, learning to use the app effectively is like learning another language. Knowledge of all the app's functions, their associated menu items, options UI and keyboard shortcuts -- all of this know-how becomes background knowledge after using the product for awhile, and requires no thought to apply.
Eventually a good Photoshop (or Word, or 3DS MAX) user gets to the point where he conceives of what he wants to do to the image, and his fingers and eyes just do it, without him thinking much about the task. This is what we mean when we talk about productivity.
The GIMP is every bit as powerful as Photoshop, lacking only some of PS's filters and its more advanced image manipulation features. The Gimp even uses some PS-like constructs, such as layers. Nonetheless, The GIMP doesn't speak precisely the same "language" as Photoshop; thus, people will always complain about how much less intuitive The GIMP is.
In the long run, the best solution to this problem is probably to develop an even more effective UI "language" for The GIMP, and target new users who have no previous experience with Photoshop. In this way, The GIMP could build a solid user base.
...no matter how well it's written.
I've used both and I can attest to the fact that GIMP is every bit as good as Photoshop. The differences between the two have to do with how well you know the apps AND most importantly how much talent you have.
The only people who think that Photoshop is better than GIMP are people with very little original creativity. They rely solely on filters and have no idea how to truly create a work of art using *ANY* tool. These are the same people who call themselves graphic designers and web designers but put up garish images that they didn't create with their own hands. They used filters and pulled source images from royalty free libraries. This is what's wrong with the world today: crafts are being mistaken for art.
Give a true artist a #2 pencil and some paper and they will give you a valuable work of art. Give a hack a fine set of brushes, oil paints and a canvas, and they will give you crap.
That would make GIMP the fine set of brushes, oil paints and canvas. And people like you, hacks.
Un-news
Made Linux versions of their software I would never have to use Windows or OS-X again, and would be a much nerdier and happier person (happier cause I wouldn't have to keep upgrading both my expensive OS's).....
Of course there is a 99% chance that will NEVER happen, and even if I use Wine or (insert YOUR favorite Crossover app) I still have to have windows on a partition - hence I still am supposed to buy/pay for a copy of windows - so why not just have Windows....
Ave Molech Setting
"While animation studios compete fiercely for ticket sales and are not known as team players, all three agreed that a project that would benefit the entire open-source community--while delivering a technology they needed--was worth their cooperation"
And isn't that what open source is all about? An itch to scratch that turns into something useful?
Vip
I think you are only partly right. Users of any application have different needs, from very rudementary capabilities to the most esoteric. Disney falls in the latter category.
By using Wine etc. anyone can use Linux on the desktop regardless of where on this curve they find themselves.
The Linux native application programs can gracefully improve and anyone can make the switch when the OSS version meets their needs.
You will have a smooth crossover mechanism.
Help fight continental drift.
However, Disney's legal department has developed a policy that enables Disney to protect its intellectual property while keeping within the statutes of the GNU General Public License, he said.
I agree, but do you think we could encourage Apple to support The GIMP (which runs decently over X11 on OS X already)? It would give people a choice and Adobe the competition they need to do improve their UI.
What Apple's given back to the community is undeniable, as is what they've received from it. The GIMP seems like it could be a great tool in the vein of iMovie and iPhoto if there was weight thrown to develop it in that direction.
Spielberg Katzenberg Geffen (as in David Geffen, the record company exec).
Hell, I use Emacs for photoediting. It's a little hard modifying binary files by hand but you will eventually get the hang of it. I'm sure there is a preconfigured shortcut key for this but I havent found it yet.
What company do we hate the most?:
- Microsoft
- SCO
- Adobe
- Disney
- AOL
- Cowboy Neal only hates the french
(only 6 so far, help!)
Everybody has a purpose in life, maybe mine is to lurk in slashdot.
An application doesn't bestow one with talent no matter how well it's written.
But it can be a tool that makes a talented person's life a hell of a lot easier.
A talented carpernter may be able to build a house with a Bowie knife and 20 acres of forest, but its not exactly the quickest and easiest way of doing it, especially if there are commercial demands and deadlines to meet. Sure, you're pure "artist" could render Finding Nemo with a #2 pencil, but how long would it take him.
Personally, for the amount of PSing I do (bad Fark contests) the gimp and PS (or PS Elements) is a wash (mainly because I suck eggs). BUT... from the folks who do some sort of graphic design for a living almost all of them swear by PS, and quite a few of them have dicked around with the GIMP as well. To a (wo)man they all say it just isn't as good of a tool to get the type of work done in a timely manner.
No, that exploding sound you hear is thousands of wine fanatics reading the article and going, "Wine is NOT AN EMULATOR!!
I thought the joke embedded in the acronym was that it stood for BOTH of:
- WINdows Emulator.
- Wine Is Not an Emulator.
Because it DOES provide a Windows API (which is one of the definitions of "emulator") but DOESN'T software emulate the machine itself (which is part of the USUAL definition of "emulator"), instead running the application's executable code "directly on the metal" - avoiding the massive speed penalty - and doing as much as practical of the API emulation by leveraging Linux native services rather than replacing them.
But I don't actually KNOW how much of that is true. If one of the WINE core group can confirm or correct this post I'd appreciate it.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
"To a (wo)man"
What are you a feminist hag? Cut the shit, and cut the PolitiallyCorrect doublespeak.
Last I checked, Photoshop was around $600 per workstation. XP Pro is $200/station, and I think licenses for NT/2K/2K3 server are around $100/seat. So really, Windows ended up being the cheaper part of of the equation, at $300 per station.
Linux = $600 PS cost
Windows = $200 XP cost + $100 server cost + $600 PS cost = $900
Windows doesn't come with Photoshop free.
I'm on a road shaped like a figure eight; I'm going nowhere but I'm guaranteed to be late.
IBM is a big evil corporation, UNTIL they help your cause.
Red Hat is a back stabbing linux distributor unitl they file suit against SCO.
Novell is our enemy until they pour money into Ximian.
While I like and dislike companys based on their actions, I don't think any are inherently evil or good. They are just companies trying to make a buck, well, a few zillion bucks, and will do whatever they think they can get away with in the process.
If SUN, tomorrow, dropped Solaris and said they were betting the company on linux, investing 20 billion dollars, everyone would be singing the praises of SUN, for seeing the light and coming over from the dark side. That is, right up until they decide that Solaris was really a better OS and drop linux. Then they are the scum of the earth, no vision, liars and theifs only out to undermine linux for their own gains.
The idea here being, let the corps battle amongst themselves, take what good they do as a bennie and move on. IBM would torch LINUX in 1/4 of a heartbeat if it had a better alternative that could make them billions. End of story.
Does Gimp support CMYK, like Photoshop? Do you know it is REALLY important if you are doing graphics for a living?
If the GIMP acted more like...well, any other image editor, it might be an easier sell.
Even Photopaint and Paint Shop Pro are reasonably similar to Photoshop. Painter is also adopting the Photoshop-like interface.
To me, the GIMP might have features and capabilities close to Photoshop (in my experience it doesn't...unusable files and strange stuff like blur also darkening images), but I know how to use Photoshop. Other programs import layered Photoshop documents (After Effects anyone?). Subjectively, I think the interface is *terrible*. That's me, other folks may like it. But it keeps me from using the program, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.
Don't get me wrong, it's an admirable project. I can't see using it professionally though. Some do (film GIMP, or whatever it's called now), but I don't.
As for the cost of Photoshop...it's reasonable. It's a professional tool that's pretty standard. Buy it in a bundle for $1000 (or $500 educational). If you can't afford that, get Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop Elements. Considering it's pretty much a one time major expense coupled with $150 upgrades every 18-24 months, it's not a bad professional or serious hobby use cost. If all you want is to resize a pic for a background or something, obviously you don't need Photoshop. If you stand to make several thousand dollars from a project, $150 for that Photoshop 7 upgrade isn't much...having the right tools is worth quite a bit.
After all, Microsoft themselves ported it to NT.
It - the Win32 subsystem - simply runs on top of the Native NT API, along with a POSIX sub(standard - haw!)system, and an OS/2 subsystem (and others).
So, create the API and libraries, and then tons of companies will be able to recompile their apps for Linux.
In order for this to work I would avoid the GPL like an illness - I suggest an Apache style license.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
And I suppose a talented physicist can build a nuclear reactor out of two sticks of chewing gum and a pencil? The interesting thing is that GIMP fans only ever say "GIMP is as good as Photoshop". Photoshop people say "photoshop is better than the GIMP" The one area that GIMP is claimed to be superior than photoshop is in the price. That doesn't make it better at the job, it just makes it cheaper.
It sounds like you never used photoshop of any period of time. I have been using GIMP for years until last year when I got a Mac and after having GIMP Crash on me every 5 minutes I forked over some cash and got photoshop (I got it at a good price off ebay) And even though I have more years with GIMP I must say Photoshop is a lot better then the GIMP and that is without the filters. It may have most of the same tools but I found photoshop is layed out in a method that is a lot easier to use and more powerful. Sure you can make art with any tool. I have seen some quality pictures done in MS Paint. I am no means a graphical full graphical artest but I need to give my programs I make a nice polish to them and I found that using Photoshop allows me to make a lot looking nicer application then with GIMP. And having tools that make your life easier is not a hack it is a tool to make yourself a lot easier. It is like saying that a person is not a true artest because they need to use a ruler to make a straight line.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
"The idea: develop technology using the Wine emulator to run Adobe Photoshop on Linux."
Had they funded the development of advanced features in GIMP and make it as powerful as Photoshop it would be really be something Important.
Here is the correct link Wine
The link posted was marked Wine was really a link to codeweavers windows emulator.
Wise men speak because they have something to say, Fools because they have to say something!!!!
NO TEXT, SEE SUBJECT, k?
- expand the canvas so that nothing gets cropped out during the rotation, then
- invoke the rotation command, then
- re-crop so that no extra canvas remains
I'm kind of curious as to how such a simple operation as a rotation could have been implemented so counterintuitively for so long. (Please, no "quite whining and do it yourself" posts, I'm busy with other things and I would have done it right the first time anyway).- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
I always thought a lot of the interface complaints came from people who were used to using Photoshop and then couldn't find stuff in the Gimp because it didn't just copy the Photoshop interface.
I got used to using the Gimp then I tried out my sister's copy of Photoshop for a couple of simple operations. I found the Photoshop interface to be a bit less efficent (the gimp would include a couple of useful features in a dialog box that Photoship didn't) in a couple of places, but more or less equivilent in my mind.
The biggest stumbling block I see for the Gimp is lack of native CMYK support, which is a big deal in the professional publishing biz (or so I'm told). After trying Photoshop, I went back to the Gimp and never thought twice about it.
I read the internet for the articles.
If Gimp was working satisfactory for you until now, then you don't need CMYK. Which is the only fine line difference between them, and user interface, yes.
Actually the GIMP has a CMKY plug-in now too. The author says it was a bit of a hack but it works. I haven't tried it myself as I have no need for that functionality. Still interesting though.
Speaking of the GIMP... What's been going on with GIMP development lately anyhow? It seems to be just crawling along. The GIMP used to be pretty close to Photoshop in funtionality but it's *really* starting to fall behind as of late. Even Paint Shop Pro is more featureful than the GIMP now. I'm not slamming the GIMP devs but I'm just wondering what has happened to this once prodigious project as of late?
G. Washington on Government "it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
Back in the late 80's, the mainframe companies refused to port their software to MS. It was too small of a market. After all, it was only the cheap (or small) companies that use a MS system. And these small start-ups with their shareware did not have a chance against those companies. Yep, companies like Lotus, Borland, and Intuit were never going to to be able to compete against the big boys. After all, they only had a small fraction of a small market.
Those who do not study history are bound to repeat it.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
OK so how do you change the size of a brush short of making a new brush. I mean change is interactivly. I have to use filmgimp for a project and I for the life of me can not find out how to change brush size on the fly.
Let's see...hmmm...port 4 million lines of code, once, or continue to be bled by SGI for their hardware/software every year...hmmm...how much did that cost...hmmm...how stupid am I?...hmmm...
I'd say they were already saving money 3 months later, and every month after that is gravy. If they ported last year, they already are saving millions, or by your analogy, it didn't cost them anything, they actually profited tremendously by doing so.
Next time ask someone with a more than a twinkie in their head before you post.
Can someone please explain how another proprietary application ported to Linux benefits the open source community?
This benefits Linux users, particularly users who don't care about software freedom at all, but only about technical aspects.
Is the definition of open source community "everybody who runs at least one open source program as a user"? Well, that's certainly not my definition.
I'm no where near what you'd consider a graphic artist. But even I've found limitations to the GIMP. Mostly the Windows build of GIMP is not stable. I'm not going to run Linux here at work because it would be counterproductive at this time.
-- taking over the world, we are.
I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
That's not the issue here. The issue here is that the Gimp GUI is so braindamaged that it is almost like the authors deliberately designed it to hinder whatever it is you want to do with the program.
Please, please, please tell me this. WHY THE FUCK does Gimp have all of its image processing functions in a goddamn right-mousebutton pop-up menu that hides the image you're trying to process in the first place? Jesus Christ! You couldn't make a worse design even if you tried.
And it has not been fixed just because of the attitude you show here. "Oh yeah? Our system is counterintuitive? Well, boy. There's only one thing I can tell you: just take your time learning our GUI because there is no way in hell that we would stoop as low as using the same GUI the people are familiar in the first place."
BOO! TERRO
I've used GIMP some, though it's not my main thing. There've been a couple of times that i wanted to use existing Photoshop files from clients, but as of then at least, I couldn't find a way to import or export them. Is there a way? Would it be difficult to build a PS I/O plugin for the GIMP? Even output only would help, but input would allow existing PS users to move to The GIMP if they are so inclined.
I know that many image formats are supported by both, but AFAIK there's no format that includes the layer and alpha channel data. Am I wrong?
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
Do you have any specific examples of the "several extra clicks for each and every manipulation"?
I've used both tools quite a bit and I don't find the GIMP to require lots of extra clicks. For stuff on the tool palette it's pretty much the same number of clicks, for other stuff that's accessible only through the menus it's either one extra click to pop up the menu -- but you don't have to move the mouse to the top of the screen, so I think that's a wash -- or potentially far fewew clicks if you happen to have "torn off" the submenu you need.
From my point of view, however, the really big win with the GIMP is scriptability. I take lots of pictures and the ability to batch process them is fantastically useful (and ImageMagick can't do all of what I need). This may not be a great feature for non-programmers, but for those of us who aren't afraid to write a little Python code, it's huge.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
That's why I quit using Photoshop years ago and got hooked on Fireworks. If the Macromedia suite of tools ever gets ported or wine'd, now that'll be a story. Dreamweaver, Fireworks and Flash on *nix...ahhhhh such a sweet dream.
In my experience, Wine is a great way to use Windows-only tools under Linux (e.g. the 7-zip tools ) when you need to. However, using it consistently is a lot of work. From the Wine FAQ, "Wine is chasing a moving target since every new release of Windows contains new API calls or variations to the existing ones." Ergo, Wine will never be "finished" or "complete". Our favorite Wine still needs to age a bit before it is ready to be served. Even so, it is wonderfully valuable when needed.
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? Major: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action
Following Codeweavers Wine mailing lists:
They announced support for dreamweaver and flash in next release, although I don't know if that means MX versions.
Then maybe you'll be dreaming at day:)
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
you need exchange on linux?
tried ximian connector?
http://ximian.com/products/connector/
hth
i wish i was but oh well
This only encourages Adobe to put even less effort in linux. Why bother making your product work properly on linux when you can have others do it for you free of charge?
This is just free money for Adobe and lets them sell additional copies without having to worry about support or how well the product works. This isn't going to pressure Adobe into anything.
Taking Wine to its obvious conclusion you have to ask yourself, why turn Linux into a Windows clone?
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Adobe products come to linux. It's just that I don't see Wine doing anything but crippling linux in the long run.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Predictably, you got modded all the way up to 5, even with that nick.
I know you're gonna feel frustrated. That doesn't mean real CMYK. If you'd read mailing lists you'd know that's naive CMYK suport.
But next version of GIMP will have Color models that support real CMYK
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
Once you get used to how it differs (and you can do that by clicking randomly a few times) it ceases to be.
OS/2's failure was in no small part due to the lack of native applications. It was just assumed that Windows binaries worked, which they did. But then, there was no advantage to running OS/2. Linux would do well to bear it in mind.
((lambda x ((x))) (lambda x ((x))))
No sorry you're wrong. There's a very good reason that Photoshop is an industry standard, and it has nothing to do with filter whores.
Photoshop has:
-A much larger toolset than GIMP.
-Better image processing algorithms (some of which are patented alas, but that doesn't reduce their quality)
-CMYK (hello? ever worked with print?)
Don't get me wrong, in no way do I mean to belittle the huge achievment that the GIMP is, I would say it is the second best image processor out there, but it's not the best yet.
One day...
Don't get me wrong, I use The Gimp almost exclusively for my photo-editing needs. (Although in some simple situations xv or the pbmplus utilities suffice). But it does lack a few very important things (IMHO) that Photoshop provides.
If you're interested in contacting Adobe, here's a direct link to their Feature Request form. I suggest as many of us as possible to visit this page and let Adobe know there certainly is a demand for their product. We're talking 3 studios here, including Disney. Lets make some (positive) noise!
http://www.adobe.com/support/feature.html
To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
Grr... another one of these posts. This doesn't mean Photoshop runs in Linux, it is essentially running in Windows; in Linux.
You're almost dead-on. There're just two points you scraped the edges on-- first off, the NES that Nesticle emulated is 8-bit, not 16.. and secondly, DosBOX is and isn't an emulator at the same time.
Yes, it's emulating the hardware, but the DOS implementation is a lot more like Wine as of the last time I checked-- it's handling calls at the API layer rather than emulating the whole OS.
"WHY THE FUCK does Gimp have all of its image processing functions in a goddamn right-mousebutton pop-up menu"
So they are easier to get to. In addition, the fact that it is multiple windows allows you to make better use of the screen. I love the GIMP design, and even prefer it on Windows because I hate the Photoshop "take-over-your-screen" approach. Interestingly, the only reason they did that was because they needed a fast kludge to get their MacOS product working on Windows. There are 2 reasons people like Adobe's interface:
1) They are used to it. Most people, once they actually learn GIMP's interface, like it better.
2) It has custom-designed toolchests. Every toolbox in Photoshop _looks_ like it was designed by an artist, and not just stock toolkit buttons. This doesn't make it more functional, but does add appeal to those who are artistically minded.
Engineering and the Ultimate
You know what I say... If companies don't want to produce Linux versions of their software, screw-em. I'm not going to go through the hassle to run Wine just so I can pay someone for the use of their program that they could put a trivial effort into porting if they wished.
There's no IE for Linux, fine, I'll use Mozilla/Netscape/Opera.
Same thing goes for Photoshop. If they don't want to put the small effort into making it work on Linux, I'll use Gimp for most stuff, and where I need more functionality, I can put it in, or I can pay someone else to put it in, and it with that one-time cost, it will forever be available to anyone that wants it. Instead of paying for Photoshop and Windows licenses... Pay a good programmer to code any functionality into the Gimp that you previously needed Photoshop for.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I expect the first Linux app will be a Photoshop render farm client.
Can't be that hard, I expect it is the GU Interface that is the hard to port part.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
instead of pestering someone else to port Adobe Photoshop, why don't you start using the gimp.
The gimp is a steaming pile of dog shit. It is the most aptly named program, ever.
Everybody certainly should know by now, because that's the one feature ALWAYS thrown out to differentiate between gimp and Photoshop. It amazes me nobody has added it yet, because obviously it's a showstopper.
I can hardly run mirc with wine on a 1ghz computer
:)
I ran mIRC with WINE on a 400Mhz computer, in KDE/RH9. Its performance was more than adequate - in fact, seeing as mIRC is quite the responsive application (it's not really doing all that much compared to say, Photoshop), I'd say it behaved damn well. As fast as mIRC runs on my XP 1800+ with Windows, so I'm not sure just how much faster you expect it to get
Perhaps your system is less than optimally configured?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Not funny, didn't get the original joke and simply insulting. Posts like this just bring the quality of /. down.
Monitors, Projectors and all light emitting devices are RGB!
On a press CMYK works by absorbing the RGB light rays (from white light) respectively, depending on the amount of ink on the paper, (in halftone or even solid depending on the color required) thus the reflected light (which is not absorbed) is what gives the color you see when reflected.
Calibrating your monitor correctly is important, color seperation is NOT required unless you are doing pre-press. Have a 4 color printer attached to your PC do you? (for those not paying attention black is NOT a color!)
I use PS on Windows for all my digital photo editing (as can be seen in my signature). But I still need to use Windows because my scanner, a Canon scanner, only has software for Windows. If the scanner worked in Linux then all my digital photo editing would no longer require Windows.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
The GIMP is missing some key functionality, including decent print support (CMYK support and separations, control over output, pantone support, spot separations, just to name a few), plugins as layer modes, operation history trees (may be improved in 1.3.x), and a slew of filters. In addition, the GIMP is quite limited in text handling (a good chunk of that is due to font nastiness under X), and it is horribly slow to use on large (i.e. print-sized) images. In fact, it's just horribly slow across the board, but when working on web banners and buttons, you don't see it.
There are also a lot of little niceties, the sorts of touches that a program with a full-time dedicated team of programmers and designers put in, the sorts of things most open source developers fail at. (Menu ordering, accessibility of operations, speed, frictionless interface, libraries of brushes, textures, gradients, etc. that far surpass what comes with The GIMP.)
People who claim that The GIMP is up there with Photoshop haven't looked at Photoshop since version 5.0 -- to which The GIMP 1.2 compared quite favorably (less print and large images). Photoshop has come a lot further since that version, but the improvements may not be obvious to the casual user. The graphics professional, however, can clearly see that The GIMP still has a ways to go before it stands a chance of displacing Photoshop -- and The GIMP still needs an Illustrator and a Quark (or even InDesign or PageMaker) analog. Yeah, Scribus is nice, but it's really only at the beginning of the hill.
If you really want to bring it up to modern standards, go help The GIMP out rather than claiming it's achieved feature parity with a program it still needs to catch up to.
well...
Even if the OSS community is just people who contribute to OSS projects, having a workhorse like Photoshop run on Linux means that the overall Linux market expands. That means there's a greater audience for all those 1337 OSS text editors (and other more mature projects). That means that the OSS community has greater relevance to the rest of the world. And increased relevance seems to be a benefit, to me at least. Of course, some folks could prefer some sort of illusion of elite isolation instead of relevance....Mom's basement is good for that.
there is no such thing an an intuitive interface if you have never used a computer
:
:
.. programs .. leechftp .. bookmarks .. remote.domain.com", naturally Everyone's Milage Varies.
.. browse and then tab auto-complete my way to c:\Progra~1 and beyond.
once you've started then you become engrossed in the culture and pressing TAB becomes "intuitive" for moving between web form fields.
(you know the TAB key, the one that says
|<-
->| on it)
This might feel a bit strange if you come from a land where you used a non PC keyboard and spend your time looking for the "next field" key.
For me pressing alt and dragging windows around in enlightenment is "intuitive". Then I use Windows and I have to find the little bar at the top with the program's name in.
For some people scrolling around using a little wheel in the mouse is intuitive but when they come to my house they can't use the web because I have a proper 3 button mouse with no wheels. If I want to scroll I use the pageup/pagedown keys or the spacebar.
Intuitive means nothing. Even the fabled nipple is learned.
What people need to realise is that you cannot make an interface that is right for everybody.
The best one I've ever used is this one
plan9.desktop-Dec-2002.jpg
I find it more "intuitive" (and like 10x faster) to open a terminal window and type "ftp remote.domain.com" than to play the menu game with "start
I can't be arsed looking for icons in Windows any more. I just do a WindowsKey-R
Linux/Unix/other interface is only daunting if you haven't invested your time learning it.
Just like you did when you learned to use Windows.
If it is so easy to use and set up why are there still so many people still using 800x600?
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Did I ever say that this applies to print? No. CMYK is only needed by professionals who do print. A professional graphic artist does not always do print. In fact most don't.
Photoshop in linux...? Could this be a bad thing? Once you have the end-all photo editing suite available in linux, what happens to all the great photoshop-esque programs that opensource devs have been woring on for years? It sort of sticks a knife in the gimp's throat, if you know what i mean. Now, being that it's running on WINE and not being ported to run on linux directly, this might not be the case.
Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
Sure, Wine using its own reimplemented DLLs probably doesn't run as many apps as Wine using Microsoft's DLLs, but as long as the app you want to use works "properly", then Wine works "properly" for you. Which app do you use regularly that works with Microsoft's DLLs but not with the free ones?
That said, if DisneyCo is using the work of the commons, why can't it give back to the commons?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Am I incorrect in my understanding that in order to run Windows in Wine on Linux, you will need to purchase a Windows license? Piracy aside that is...
If that is true, how exactly is this a good thing and a move in the right direction for the community?
Your still paying for Windows, now you just have another layer between you and the OS to slow things down and maybe make it a little less stable (I haven't used Wine, DON'T take this as a put-down, I have no knowledge of how it does or does not perform).
When I can run it natively without having to purchase the Windows license, give me a call, then it's worth someting. Until then, this is non-news as far as I'm concerned.
(Assuming my basic presumption is correct... if it's not, the rest of the argument is of course invalid).
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm no troll. Although I play one on Slashdot at times. If you're too stupid to get the name, then you're too stupid for me to waste any more time on.
No, Wine is a Win32 subsystem re-implementation. There is a very important difference. In fact, it was so important to the authors that they put it in the name!
Thank you for making my point. And just why should they learn yet another interface? Because it is "better"?
Well, I'm sure the authors think it is better, but if at least one of them would take his head out of his ass for once, he'd realize that the professional people do not want "better" GUIs, they want GUIs they are familiar with - something they can get the work done right away and not after learning yet another goddamn arrangement of menus, buttons and dialogs.
This is what you open source people just don't seem to get. You people Ignore (with capital I) what the end users want. You are so caught up with being different, revolutionary and 3133t that you want to revise everything. Well, the Adobe GUI does not need revising. People already know how to use it. Revise whatever is under the hood instead. Make it work faster. Make it work more reliably. Make it do more. But whatever you do, don't change the interface.
You may have the time to tweak your kernel, compile your applications and learn a dozen new programming languages a week, but when it comes to the real world you need the results now - preferably already yesterday. Work under the hood and clone the de facto standard interfaces shamelessly.
BOO! TERRO
Why bother making your product work properly on linux when you can have others do it for you free of charge?
If Marketing can convince Quality Assurance to test the Windows ports of the publisher's products on all three platforms (Wine, Windows 9x, and Windows NT) instead of just two (9x and NT), then Marketing scores an extra bullet point in the products' features lists.
why turn Linux into a Windows clone?
Commercial distributors of emancipated operating systems want whatever the market wants. During my college education (1999-2003), the market wanted a Windows clone.
Will I retire or break 10K?
...the OTHER platforms Linux runs on, where WINE doesn't even work?
Linux is Open Source (or GPL/whatever you want to refer to it as). We need Open Source apps for it, or it'll be incomplete.
Something that works on a few linux machines with a hack only serves to make the whole platform look unprofessional.
A lot of people bring up print as a necessity. However, it is not. I don't do print. I'm not a professional. But professional does not equal artist and vice-versa. I am not going to spend a ton of money on Photoshop just to edit my vacation photos. Saying that... yes I have used the latest Photoshop and I still don't see what the difference is if you REALLY KNOW how to use GIMP. Just having a few extra steps to take to get to a finished product isn't a big deal to me. I can do anything with GIMP that a Photoshop user can (barring print).
The other issue someone mentioned is fonts. Again, don't use something if you don't know what you are doing or how to do it right. If you understand the font system in X, it's possible to get output that rivals Windows or the Mac. It requires research and is not for the faint of heart, but I've been doing this for a while now. So the font issue is non-existent if you are persistent and intelligent.
Un-news
I've used both and I can attest to the fact that GIMP is every bit as good as Photoshop...
The only people who think that Photoshop is better than GIMP are people with very little original creativity.
I love the Gimp. I use it all the time. It does everything I need and more. It does everything that many Photoshop users would ever need and more.
But your statements are still very wrong and misleading. The Gimp does not have support for 16-bit color channels. Period. This is not something that can just be hacked on; it would require rewriting major sections of the code. For anyone who needs to work with images that have more than 8 bits of precision per color channel, the Gimp is simply not an option.
It's great to spread the word about the Gimp. But it's counterproductive when you spread false claims about the Gimp and insult Photoshop users.
Darn tooting!
I have used both applications extensively. I do a fair amount of image editing, both professionaly and for various projects of mine. At work I use photoshop, becuase it is allows me to accomplish my tasks much much more quickly. Being as I am by no means a wealthy person, and because I respect the intellectual property of programmers, I looked for the best, cheapest solution at home. I have an old version of photoshop for MacOS9 running side by side with Gimp. Niether is exactly native to OSX, but both run just fine. I use Photoshop for probably 80% of my tasks, graphic converter for 15% and Gimp for 5%. For the vast majority of tasks GIMP is way behind.
Emacs: (gazillion unintuitive ctrl+Y+alt+Xmeta+Q key combinations just to edit your "source code"; as an added bonus, get stuck in a one-line minibuffer just for the fun's sake until your random experimentation reveals that ctrl+G gets you out of that trap and you can actually save your text...)
LaTeX: latex foo.tex; xdvi foo.dvi; (repeat ad nauseam until the layout looks right); pdf2ps foo.dvi -o foo.ps; lpr -Pfooprint foo.ps
The layout looks like shit? I have to change the marginals, fonts and the look of those title headers. What? I have to edit some crappy style-files and learn a programming language while I'm at it?!
So the answer to your question is: Yes, I do prefer Word with all its problems with reproducible page layout and proper math editor.
BOO! TERRO
well done for finding the place to rotate selections, not an easy task
.. Transform Tools .. Transform" (or Shift-T)
:
.. Rotate .. 90/180/270"
.. " nope nothing there
.. " same
.. Colors .. Invert" lord help me
"Tools
I know you would have expected it to be on the Selection menu but that would be too sensible.
Anyway that does a freehand rotation (you can, however type the angle of rotation in)
To rotate a selection in multiples of 90 you need the
"Layers
which curiously doesn't rotate the layer if you have a selection
Okay so now you've got in in your head let's invert the colours.
"Selection
"Layers
"Image
Ah, that inverts the colours of the current layer despite most of the other commands on the menu working on the global image.
No, wait! That only inverts colours in the current selection if present.
Good luck finding how to set the Pattern Source for the Clone Tool
oh, and the windows version doesn't work with my tablet
I use Gimp at least once a day and I still have to look through the menus to find things.
I don't do graphics work any more [see my url if you'd like to see what I used to do]
but if I did I'd buy Photoshop in an instant, oh and Corel Painter {for years I wondered what had happened to Fractal Painter, now I know}
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Anything beyond the most trivial CYMK support (i.e. anything adequate for commercial purposes) is tied up in patents.
It's not legal for them to implement.
DNA just wants to be free...
I think something that hasn't been mentioned but should is that when big corporations put forth money and thier power so publicly as in this case, software companies will notice. Even if its the developers of WINE, they notice. And thats better for us all because it gives us the flexability to use whatever operating system we choose and still be able to run the apps we desire to run. I don't know about you, but I never have been comfortable running any MS product. Especially windows. Knowing that I can use *nix and still be able to run my windows apps, makes me sleep a little better.
Having more applications will help Linux. Whatever ensures the most, in the long term, is the best. I don't think that Wine will hurt us in the long term, as you do.
My company has already begun to test our windows apps under Wine. We're not going to do anything to break that compatibility, even if it means we won't adopt new MS APIs. If anyone is hurt here, I think it's MS. They've lost the ability to drag us around to new incompatible systems. Their API has become a commodity, available from other vendors (wine) and we're not going to "upgrade" to a proprietary version.
There might not be a huge number of Photoshop users in Linux, but I doubt that Adobe is going to break compatibility for them. These are pretty influential customers after all. That means that MS is no longer the only x86 Photoshop platform, and Photoshop is a destination app; one you buy a machine to be able to run.
Hell, if Adobe has to break Wine compatibility in the future, it'll probably be in their best interests to help patch wine to run the new version of Photoshop.
That would make GIMP the fine set of brushes, oil paints and canvas. And people like you, hacks.
What a pompous load of shit. This is like arguing that artists who buy ready-made oil paints are just hacks and real artists gather minerals in the field and grind their own pigments by hand.
Yes, you can do in GIMP most of what you can do in Photoshop, but the simple fact of the matter is that you can do it more quickly and easily in Photoshop. If you're a prima donna fine artist (or fancy yourself one, which sounds like the case here), then you can afford to screw around with whatever tool floats your boat. If you are a commercial artist, you are generally producing "art" to satisfy the specifications and budget constraints imposed by a client who doesn't give a rat's ass what tool you use as long as the end product is on time and under budget.
Which is why commercial artists tend to have mortgages and car payments and fine artists tend to have attitude problems.
The GIMP is on a par with Photoshop 3 or 4. Those who say otherwise need to become more familiar with the current Photoshop featureset. This is all painfully familiar of the whining I used to hear from TeX users about how Word didn't do such-and-such that TeX did, when in actual fact Word did have the feature in question.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Here are a couple examples I use all the time in Photoshop:
1) Spacebar panning - you would think GIMP would at least have the keyboard shortcuts down. Nope! Got to go to the scrollbars!
2) Spacebar selection positioning - When you are making a selection in Photoshop you can switch to moving the selection origin by pressing the spacebar. I use this all the time.
3) Fullscreen modes - pressing 'f' in Photoshop toggles between fullscreen modes. I still can't figure out if these are even possible in the GIMP. They definitely aren't linked to a key.
4) Tab hides the tool palletes - although this kind of works in the GIMP, the multi-windowed strategy makes the image window lose focus so the hiding only works one way.
5) Clicking on the Photoshop background opens an image
6) Hitting enter in Photoshop with dialogs actually closes the dialog - picking the default option
I'm not a real artist and these things bother me. I can only imagine the list that a real artist has. Yes, I agree that most of these are extremely simple things. It just shows that Adobe has actually tested the product with real artists for real tasks. For authoring tasks, be they writing, programming, or image manipulation - the details are very important.
Most people are going to do fine with the GIMP. People just need to accept that the real artists care about the details. So GIMP can either copy Photoshop exactly, do their own usability testing, or accept their lot in life.
Never underestimate the power of fiber.
your presumption is incorrect...Wine reverse engineers the Windows API, so there is no need for a MS license since there is no MS product present.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
The real world is not CMYK. Your eyes only sense things in RGB. The only time CMYK is relevant is for putting things on dead trees, and there it can easily be converted to. You don't actually have to edit in it on your monitor (Which, like your eyes, is RGB, and that's not a coincidence.)
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Herein lies the rub... ...from the folks who do some sort of graphic design for a living almost all of them swear by PS, and quite a few of them have dicked around with the GIMP as well. To a (wo)man they all say it just isn't as good of a tool to get the type of work done in a timely manner.
"dicked around with" GIMP is the major problem. People who say Photoshop is so much easier than the GIMP have YEARS or experience with PS, and only passing experience with the GIMP. Of COURSE things will be easier/faster with PS!
The user interface differences are a major hurdle because things become reflexive when you are used to it while they have to be thought about or hunted for.
Other than decent CYMK support and bitching about all the filters you've accumulated for PS that don't work with the GIMP, can anyone itemize why exactly PS is light years ahead of the GIMP?
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
No, some of the graphic artists are, you know, WOMEN. If they were all guys I would have said "to a man."
The title of this article is misleading. While they are running photoshop under wine, the more interesting fact I found was that they ported all their GUI stuff to QT and are running that natively! Clearly their goal is to be using platform indepent stuff based on Qt. Awesome!
Will Stokes Album Shaper http://albumshaper.sf.net
Because it already has a Windows render farm capability
"I already have a CPU in here, why would I need another one?"
I guess you've never edited a 200dpi poster
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Again, these folks do this for a *living*, have deadlines to meet, etc. Why force them to eat into productive time to learn a new program just to meet someone else's political view of "what's right"?
This is the thrust of the entire article. Disney's (and the two other, unnamed companies') workers use Photoshop. Moving PS from windows to linux obviously saved more money from ditching Windows licenses over time than the investment they put into tweaking WINE. Save $$$ = good. But, as the article stated, GIMP and CinePaint didn't meet their requirements. Thus, there was no saving of $$$ since the time and effort needed to bring GIMP and CinePaint up to the level of PS (not to mention training) would cost more than the savings they would have gotten from tossing the Adobe licenses. One day this *may* happen in the future, but obviously it wasn't a good business decision now.
Just because it doesn't meet some zealot's political muster doesn't mean it was a bad idea.
I know it's been said already a great deal, but I want to state it clearly: among other things, I'm a graphic designer and use Photoshop all friggin' day. I run a Linux webserver for my web sites and have a couple Linux boxes around the house and in my office for file sharing, server testing, etc and the single biggest reason I haven't given up Windows on my desktop is precisely because I need Photoshop all friggin' day. However, this put the final nails in the Windows coffin.
Nobody I know who does serious graphic design takes the GIMP seriously. I believe this has to do with the GIMP's awful interface, limited (with respect to Photoshop) feature set, Photoshop's name recognition, and the widespread support for Photoshop.
Graphic designers who do it for the love, from my experience, tend to be like me in that in that they are open minded about the OS they use and share the values of the open source and free software movement to a significant extent precisely because of the creative and moral nature of good graphic design--beauty and social importance are values with a premium for many graphic designers. And, as everybody knows, supporting Microsoft with our money may actually have negative social consequences for the 99% of our society that brushes up to information technology every now and then. Because of this many good graphic designers could be persuaded to make the move to Linux.
Here's the final point, and it's really the kicker: the Mac gained and retained a lot of prestige precisely because it was the graphics platform of choice for so long and a great deal of that had to do with Photoshop. Even though graphic design users make up a small part of the population of software users relative to people who word-process and write email, almost anyone familiar with technology used to know that the Macintosh was a) expensive and b) capable of and almost exclusively used by professionals to create beautiful graphics. This helped keep Apple's reputation going even when things were going to hell in a handbasket for everything Apple-related. For whatever reason, use for professional graphics carries prestige that use for professional servers doesn't even though both are critical uses of technology. Now, what if almost everyone who monkies around on a computer heard about this Linux thing and heard that Linux was a) cheap, b) getting much easier to use and c) capable of and used by a large number of professionals to create beautiful graphics?
Online citizen journalism from the inner city: The View From The Ground
I am getting a bit tired of comparing Photoshop with GIMP. GIMP Is Mot Photoshop (well, nice try at least :). When you would search for jobs as a graphic designer, you would see that they require that you can use Photoshop (among other adobe programs). You won't see that with GIMP for some years, so yes it is THE standard (you won't find many Macs without running several Adobe applications).
Before I learned to use Photoshop, which was a requirement of my study, I used the GIMP for the homepages I designed. The handling has always been somewhat weird but I don't complain, because I get it for free. If I was in the mood of complaining, I could start a GUI fork of the project, if it didn't work out talking with the developers. When I learned Photoshop, I also found many things weird in the beginning, but it wouldn't continue to annoy me that much as the GIMP GUI does. But when I take a look at GIMP's Developer Page I see a lot of progress happening (docks, CMYK, better (not perfect) text-tool).
(yes this can be compared with sex)
RGB can be approximated to CMYK, but certain RGB values can't be reproduced in CMYK. Photoshp's CMYK support keeps you from having to deal with getting prints back that don't look like the image on your monitor.
Now if only they can get Dreamweaver to work with Crossover plugin...
I do not understand how Photoshop running under Linux is "thanks to Disney". I have been running Photoshop under Linux the same way for months now, so is it thanks to me that Photoshop runs under Linux? No. It's thanks to these guys because of what these guys started. Try to have some more integrity, would you?
Join Tor today!
What are you rambling about? Why are you trying to equate Linux with warez toting script kiddies? Warez toting script kiddies are more likely to use their warezed Photoshop with their warezed copy of Windows XP, not Linux.
"You people Ignore (with capital I) what the end users want. You are so caught up with being different, revolutionary and 3133t that you want to revise everything."
Who is "you people"?
You're saying you don't want usability improvements? That you wouldn't spend 4 hours learning something that would save you that in 2 weeks of usage?
Just because you fall into this mysterious category of "the end user" doesn't mean everyone does. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that other people won't.
My wife loves Linux - she loves the way that Mozilla and the GIMP handle - you know, the "new" way. She's not a geek. She had only run MS Windows beforehand. So, don't speak for everyone. Speak for yourself if _you_ don't like the interface, and I'm sure some will agree with you. However, neither you nor me speak for the end-user population in general.
It's this diversity that makes the world great. However, lambasting people because they like something different than you do or have different priorities than you do is silly.
Engineering and the Ultimate
No. Given the risk of investment of 4 hours wasted worktime without any guarantee of the 2 weeks time savings, I rather opt for the old system. My employee does not pay me to learn new things.
lambasting people because they like something different than you do or have different priorities than you do is silly.
I am not lambasting people. I am telling you how things stand. You don't want people to adapt Linux software? Fine. I couldn't care less - live with your "improved" GUI. You want to people like using Linux software? Then clone the user interface. Perhaps put in an option for an "enhanced" GUI in the Preferences menu, but the default GUI should be the de facto standard (Adobe, Microsoft, etc.).
BOO! TERRO
Why is the CMYK model more relevant? Why? What do you lose if you do all your work in RGB and only worry about CMYK when printing the final image?
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
One of my big stumbling blocks in moving completely out of windows is an application to replace coreldraw.
I've looked at the latest offerings on linux, and while Sodipodi is my great white hope, it still lacks key features I need to do my job.
Anyone have any luck finding a vector graphics solution?
Which is why I use Windows 3.1 with Paint.
Sincerely, True Artist
Ah, ok, fair enough. Please mod me as IGNORE DUE TO CLUELESSNESS then :)
I am suitably impressed with the accomplishment this news item describes now. Kudos.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
is it possible using the system window manager to make the text opaque and keep the background transparent?
The short answer is "no". The transparency flag for a given window applies to the entire window.
The long answer is "sorta". Win 2K/XP does support color keying, which is sort of like the green-screening that weatherman use. See, you can designate a single color, for instance RGB(0,255,0), as the key color and everything in a window that is that exact color would be transparent.
Actually, I was able to find several Macs on eBay and Apple's internet store just by using Internet Explorer. I bet Mozilla would be able to do that, too. No expensive Adobe software required.
I keep hoping the AMD 24 bit chips might thing that pushes some high end apps to Linux. Think of how fast a 64-bit native version of Photoshop could be with six or more gigs of ram!
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I wasn't saying it was a bad idea. It was a good idea.
I'm not interested in FOSS because of a political agenda, I'm interested because the level of control and customization it offers is unsurpassed. I DO understand the interface issue -- which is why I purchased Lightwave instead of learning something FOSS. I can do LW in my sleep.
(Hell, I can still close my eyes and run through DPaint IV shortcut keys!)
Over the long run, investing the time in FOSS software can lead to much greater productivity gains than with closed source software.
Finally, you didn't answer my question -- what EXACTLY does PS do better? If it is just a matter of interface difference and CYMK, then a decent skin and key bindings could go a long way.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
These are interesting; I'd like to understand them a bit better:
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
So it helps by limiting your pallete (so to speak) to that which is possible in the more limiting system you have to output with? I guess I could see that as useful, if I was in an environment where the print output was more important than the screen output. I've never been in that situation before. It seems so...last decade.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Finally, you didn't answer my question -- what EXACTLY does PS do better? If it is just a matter of interface difference and CYMK, then a decent skin and key bindings could go a long way.
No idea. As I said in the orig. post I'm (artistically) crap with both GIMP and PS and am in no position to comment on technical superiority (although I will say the learning curve for PS Elements was a hell of a lot better than for the GIMP) and the folks I kno that do graphics arts work that I know prefer PS (a few folks like Corel) over GIMP for whatever reason. I didn't state it was for technical or any other. They all, even ones who have played around with GIMP, prefer to use PS to do real work so I assume there's a very good reason for it.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=render
1 . To submit or present, as for consideration, approval, or payment: render a bill.
2. To give or make available; provide: render assistance.
3. To give what is due or owed: render thanks; rendered homage.
4. To give in return or retribution: He had to render an apology for his rudeness.
5. To surrender or relinquish; yield.
6. a. To represent in verbal form; depict: "Joyce has attempted... to render... what our participation in life is like" (Edmund Wilson).
b. To represent in a drawing or painting, especially in perspective.
7. Computer Science. To convert (graphics) from a file into visual form, as on a video display.
8. Music.
a. To perform an interpretation of (a musical piece, for example).
9. To express in another language or form; translate.
Photoshop can apply a script to a series of images.
We, and others, use(d) it to process video by frame (or field).
The distinction between
"A group of computers set up to generate frames from a 3D animation into a 2D animation"
and
"A group of computers set up to process frames from a 2D animation"
Seems a bit pointless when the collective noun "render farm" works just fine.
One could also argue that a "compile farm" performs such a similar function that it could justifiably come under the "render farm" nomenclature.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
As someone who has used GIMP for about 3 years on both Windows and Linux, and PhotoShop 7 now for about 3 months, here's my list of GIMP weaknesses compared to PhotoShop:
Just to be clear, I'm a *huge* fan of GIMP, Free Software, and the whole GNU/Linux effort. My hat is off to the GIMP developers who have *volunteered* a great amount of time to make an excellent application. Progress has been at times slow, but GIMP is now my usual recommendation to novice/web graphics types on Windows. It's good, just fine for simple needs, and even better considering the price. But it point blank doesn't have the power or polish of PhotoShop. I have no doubt that someday it will, especially if they could raise more money for development. Too bad Walt Disney and friends chose to invest in the half way solution, $45k (WD + two other unnamed) would have funded a good deal of GIMP improvement.
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
I'd give my left nut for a native port of PhotoShop on Linux. That is, if I didn't already owe it to SCo for licensing fees :--(
If you don't understand anything I post, please accept that I ate paste as a small boy...
Granted, PS is not exactly perfect in all of these items, but still a lot better than GIMP.
ok, but man, mankind, and he, are generic terms for our race and members of it who happen to be of either gender. According to the dictionary.
It's only femenists who resent that these terms can be related to the name of the male gender and therefor insist on specifying things like (s)he. For instance consider this proper english.
"When a writer uses a pen. He often considers his strokes akin to brush strokes of DeVinci."
That was proper english. Improper english which has been inspired by feminists.
"When a writer uses a pen. (S)he often considers her/his strokes akin to the brush strokes of DeVinci."
The english language makes the terms He and his in these sentences a generic term which applies to any gender. There is no need to specify... unless you ask a feminist.
Getch'er beta here.
As far as I can tell, it works as well as the Windows version. A little too well, in fact, so I downloaded this helpful little extension.
Once it's installed, go ahead and test it out.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
ok, but man, mankind, and he, are generic terms for our race and members of it who happen to be of either gender. According to the dictionary.
Is that still valid if I'm talking about a very specific group of 4-5 guys and a couple of women (the sum total of graphic artist-y types I know)?
So they got it going, great! Now what I want to
know is: HOW DO I DO THE SAME THING?
Share the wealth, Mickey!
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
It's valid no matter what group you are talking about. As long as you are using it as a generic term for a group of people or persons and wish to express it genderlessly.
Then again, going the other way is usually a safe bet, and I suspect it may change in the future with how widespread this has become.
IANAL but I'd love to have the details of that policy. This is the sort of balance required for open source to succeed in a commercial or proprietary environment - which is pretty much every "enterprise" out there. Hopefully other companies will see that Disney has made this work and muster up the courage to wet their feet in OSS.
ah, well I stand corrected.
RGB is an addative process for producing color to the eye. CMYK is a subtractive process for producing color on surfaces that bounce light to your eye. They don't equate.
If CMYK is subtractive, then how come when I add white to white, I don't get black?
A Usenet Troll Triumphs on Slashdot
I agree we need to start pestering people, but the people we need to start pestering are the Open Source developers who make desktop software that is so lacking in quality and usability that people need to turn to the big companies to provide a solution where i's are dotted and t's are crossed.
If you have to have a big company save your ass from the apathy of your very own developers, you never really had an ass worth saving.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
No shit sherlock, Duh using a non-GUI word processor will be harder than using a GUI word processor!
As a fair comparison:
Word: Type the text. File -> Print
AbiWord: Type the text. Click on the print button on the toolbar.
See! Linux IS easier!
Cats: All your base are belong to us.
Captain: Take off every sig !!
1.3 fixes all my UI complaints.
As a professional webdesigner I have used the GIMP on GNU/Linux for over 4 years. I wil agree that the GIMP is in no way in Photoshops league when it comes to print pre-press work. Although I _have_ used GIMP for print work and GIMP has performed much above expectation, but it;s not anywhere as powerful as photoshop for pre-press.
the UI issues with GIMP mentioned by some I think are personal. I happen to prefer the GIMP;s UI over Photoshops.
Reasonable smart text editing has been available in GIMP 1.2.x for a long time now via the dynamic text option. And 1.3.x developer has totally rewritten text funtionality. The main problem actually has been in the quality of the rendered glyohs. The 1,2,x Dynamic Text plugin uses a gross hack to get AA fonts, but the new 1.3.x CVS version of GIMP uses Freetype and has _excellent_ glyph AA quality.
export to PDF is a matter of knowing how to use your GNU/Linux or Unix system. Ghostscript is very very cool.
I love the GIMPs real scriptability, and I love the fact that it;s Free Software.
My single greatest annoyance with GIMP is that is still doesn;t support layer groupings. But that is on its way.
grts,
avi
- It took western civilisation 2000 years to ensure popular literacy, and now we work with icon driven GUI's. Go figure.
Oh I HOPE you AREN'T talking about me! I am not a zealot. I just get annoyed when I hear misinformed people talking down a decent program. Photoshop is fine. But GIMP just isn't that far beneath it. For *my* needs (ie. not a professional, not wealthy, but artistically inclined) GIMP is just what I need. And for most people, it's just what they need too. There is no justifying the price tag for Photoshop when you can have something that will allow you to do the same kind of work at no cost. Again, I speak for those of us who work at home and have no need to print our graphics. Printing is not necessary to most people unless they are doing pro work. Therefore, CMYK is pointless at home. If I were a professional, I would understand the need for something like Photoshop. Never did I say that GIMP is the best program in the world. I simply said that it is suitable for 90% of the people out there. Professional designers with a clue and real talent can use any program. That was my point. Photoshop is not going to allow just any Joe off the street to become a pro graphics guy. I can't tell you how many fools I've seen who have bought or pirated Photoshop only to produce complete crap. I've also seen a lot of people use GIMP to produce beautiful works of true art.
Un-news
For *my* needs (ie. not a professional, not wealthy, but artistically inclined) GIMP is just what I need.
If you read any of my posts I pretty much agree with that (but still prefer PS Elements), but this thread wasn't about what you or I needed, but what Disney's needs were. Stated in the article was that GIMP and CinePaint *didn't* meet their needs, which is why they stuck with PS. This whole thread was about why Disney, et al didn't chuck PS along with windows and go Linux/GIMP.
Pick pencil or pen tool... click anywhere... press shift... click second point.
gimp 1.3 does do CMYK, and installed along with the make install (or apt-get install) is a menurc file with PS keybindings. no, for many folks this isn't a good reason to switch.
;).
i'm a gimp fan personally, but it does suffer from one main hangup: it's slow, and the version that does CMYK is unstable as hell (esp. trying to use python scripts, and no perl scripts as of yet). one other thing, slow devel time. i think the gimp devels should take what they find good in PS, re-implement it, and make it better (easier said than done
the gimp is good, and getting better, but it still needs work so the pros and high-level amateurs can use it full-time.
What Wine DOES do, is present an imitation of the SOFTWARE calls that the Windows API presents.
According to the Oxford English dictionary, that's called EMULATION. Hardware emulation is a requirment for emulation.
Holy crap people, quit trying to redefine words in the English language.
Every Illustrator I know uses Photoshop. They use other tools like Painter as well, because Photoshop is not an illustration tool per se.
I can 100% guarantee you that artists use photoshop because its a standard. Try getting an artist to use a new PC tool sometime. Good luck.
That's not to say they wouldn't complain about the Gimp's interface. It does blow compared to photoshop, but irregardless, the artist will prefer photoshop.
We're not talking about the english language. We are talking about a proper understanding of technological terms. One of the biggest problems with technology these days is that people *think* they understand it, but they don't. It's not that they are not intelligent enough though. It's that computer technology is still too complicated for most people. In the computer technology world, emulation only means one thing, and it's not what you think it is.
Un-news
This is all painfully familiar of the whining I used to hear from TeX users about how Word didn't do such-and-such that TeX did, when in actual fact Word did have the feature in question.
(No karma bonus because it's offtopic anyway...)
You're right - but the last example isn't good. Gimp and Photoshop are examples of tools intended for the same job. TeX and Word are *not* - really not. Word is a typewriter (or word processor or whatever - TeX is a document formatting language. There's a huge difference. TeX is *designed* from the ground up to be formatting agnostic. Word isn't.
This is the same thing that another poster said a few bits up: yah, sure, you can use templates in Word to convert styles, you can have it insert math. You can also use a hex editor to make images instead of Photoshop, but you wouldn't. Just because a program has features doesn't mean that those features are useful.
In this case, Photoshop wins over GIMP because it has more features and those that they share it does better.
In the other case, you can't generically compare TeX and Word, because they don't do the same thing.
Well, right about here is where I was hoping the community was going to discuss their experiences with parameter passing and configuration for getting PS7 to work in WINE, but instead I happen upon a GIMPvsPS thread... and don't get me wrong, I use the GIMP often for web graphics and other things, although I will admit that I haven't spent a ton of time learning the UI.
/., but it saddens me when something notable like this makes the headlines, and the threads splinter off into borderline zealotry, when we could really be using this as a forum for more meaningful technical discussions (or even links to helpful stuff, when someone else has already said it best!)
As a student and senior employee at a heavily-used on-campus multimedia lab, it's my job to teach students and faculty the entire range of Adobe products, including PS. It's a standard in the academic community, primarily due to its ease-of-use across multiple platforms. Seeing *nix as a potentially compatible OS made my day. Go to a job interview for a graphic/web design opening, and when they ask you how well you know Photoshop, see what kind of funny look they give you when you expound your knowledge of GIMP. I'm not saying that GIMP sucks, but simply reiterating the 'quickest/most convenient tool for the job' mentality, platform preferences aside.
I confess I'm more of a reader than a poster on
whew! ok, sorry, I hope everyone has a great night
May the threads progress competently.
Do you know how legal it would be to use one of these programs with these algorithms in it to create something like two images that could be used together as a lookup table for converting rather than algebra?
Congratulations, you've just described how to violate the very patents that prevent implementation of high-quality color space conversion in free software. The commercial systems use such look-up tables.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Overview of Changes in GIMP 1.3.17
- Made the text tool optionally create a path [Sven, Mitch]
- Added the ability to reverse gradients to the blend tool [Mitch]
- Added dithering to the blend tool [Alastair M. Robinson]
- Changed all(?) GIMP-1.4 references to GIMP-2.0 [Sven]
- Allow to transform paths using the transform tools [Mitch]
- Added a simple CMYK color selector [Sven]
- Added naive RGB CMYK conversion routines [Sven]
- Generalized paint tools [Mitch]
- Finally a brush-shaped cursor for all paint tools [Mitch]
- Started to integrate new composite functions [Helvetix]
- Made the style for dockable tabs configurable [Mitch]
- Some preparations for text transformations [Sven]
- Store grid settings in XCF [Brix]
- Redone assembly checks and run-time checks for CPU features [Sven]
- Added lots of mnemonics to the menus [Jimmac]
- Support for comments in PNG files [Sven]
- Constified the libgimp API and adapted all plug-ins [Yosh, Sven]
- Cleaned up the brush/font/gradient/pattern selector API [Mitch]
- Support for patterns with alpha channel [Bolsh]
- Lots of bug fixes
The GIMP user interface sucks. Like a Hoover. Just look at all the silly little windows it throws up when you start it.
GIMP pops up exactly the same tool windows you had open when you last closed it, except for the Tip of the Day (which most users turn off after a week). Doesn't Photoshop pop up a whole bunch of silly little tool windows as well? Or is your real complaint that your window manager won't let you dock the toolbars?
No support for 16 bit per channel. [and] Less polish in the algorithms, both in speed and accuracy.
The CinePaint fork development team has added 16-bit support, which in itself adds more accuracy, and the changes should work their way into GIMP 2.
No support for color profiles (ICC).
Would you please pony up the money for a fully-paid-up worldwide license for the essential patents necessary to implement color conversion with ICC profiles?
No support for pressure and tilt info from drawing tablets such as Wacom's.
Then who was deluded into mentioning such support in this HOWTO?
Will I retire or break 10K?
"My employee does not pay me to learn new things."
That's really sad. You know, the difference between your slowest and fastest employees are about between 4x and 10x, at least in programming. Some of that difference is accounted to by talent, but a lot of it comes from self-directed study. Where I work, everyone spends about an hour a day learning something new, even if it is only tangentially related to what we do in our jobs. Consequently, our company has been one of the only tech companies that has been growing in our area. And it's not just the programmers - our designers, our PR people, and our sales people all take time, COMPANY time, to sharpen their skills.
Because of this, we have one of the most productive companies I've ever worked in. We are able to handle quite a big load, because we all know the _best_ ways of handling each job.
If you can double your productivity (which is fairly easy to do by this method), spending an hour a day is a minor investment.
Also note that this is not a highly capitalized operation. The company started off as 3 people who invested by charging their credit cards to the limit. Because we are able to do things so well, so fast, and so good, and for so little, we are increasing our sales in a down economy.
Engineering and the Ultimate
Then why was there not enough dissent within the ranks to prevent this?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Designer: "So how can I get Photoshop running on this Linux thing?"
Linux guy: "Are you running a recent RPM based distro?" (This should guarantee a reasonably up-to-date glibc and GCC.)
Designer: "What's that?"
Linux guy: "Red Hat 8 or later, Mandrake 9 or later..."
Designer: "Mandrake. I have that."
Linux guy: "Here's a program to install on your Linux box, called Wine. It'll run Photoshop and a lot of other Windows apps." Gives a URL to download the package, plus generic RPM installation instructions, which amount to a right-click and choose Install. (I haven't used KDE recently so I wouldn't know how it handles .rpm association.)
Designer: "And then what?"
Linux guy: "Then stick the Photoshop install CD in the drive, open setup.exe, and you're off."
Designer: "Thanks."
I admit that Wine printing is complicated, but that's a problem for distros to solve. Watch the Lindows people tackle it.
Will I retire or break 10K?
1. Spacebar panning. What I meant here is pressing spacebar switches to the hand in Photoshop (and most Adobe products actually). I didn't know about the middle mouse button thing. That mostly solves the problem for my IBM laptop but it's still a little weird on my desktop where the middle mouse button is a scrollwheel. Dragging with the scrollwheel is usually awkward.
6. Hitting enter in dialogs. I can only think of one at the moment. Here is the one I do a lot - CTRL-C, CTRL-N, ENTER, CTRL-V. In Photoshop this copies the current selection, creates a new image, and pastes the contents. In GIMP, I get stuck on the new dialog and either have to tab like crazy or go to the mouse. The escape key also doesn't dismiss any dialogs - at least on Windows.
Never underestimate the power of fiber.
You hit the nail right on the head. The same thing applies to Office. I have tried for a long time to convince my Wife to give up Word but no go even when I sit right there and do everything that she can do just as fast and reliably in OO, and StarOffice, For that matter Koffice is not that bad either. All you have to do is make one feature different and the long time user takes a long time to adjust. I guess that is the price OSS is just going to have to pay. So I just put up with having to reinstall Windows when some kind of crap happens. I cheat though I just do a fresh install backup to another drive with XXcopy then just reinstall if things screw up and then reinstall lilo.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
Are we terrorist because we prefer to support new ideas and not capitalist ones? Or maybe, it is because we would like to have control over our expensive hard earned equipment, and not Bill Gates. Linux isn't perfect; however, not even Bill himself thinks Windows is. You aren't even man enough to be anything more than an anonymous coward. This country was founded on new ideas and a better way of thinking. To think patriotically, and to follow the herd was to be British. Go back to Britain you tyrant......
And then there are the other people that start foaming at the mouth whenever a Free software project copies the GUI from established Windows software.
"WAARGH ! The OS-duplicators are at it again !".
Oh well, the developers can't win whatever they do, so they'd best ignore everyone and do what they want to do. They want a tool that THEY like to use. If other people like it, fine. If not, fine too.
You don't like it? Either use something else, create your own software or adapt the current software (or pay someone to do it).
Me, I have no problem switching between Photoshop and the Gimp. I had more trouble switching between photoshop 5 and 6.
Nobody believes the official spokesman, but everybody trusts an unidentified source. -- Ron Nesen
ok, so it's an acronym, or a term.
...
Photoshop does it natively, GIMP not at all.
I have heard their are patents. On colour. Oh well
"It's been a win-win model to have someone else provide added value to an open-source product," Brooks said.
*LOL* perhaps its a linux-linux model?
I can't belive that GIMP doesn't have a polygonal selection tool. Saying that, I've been working in Photoshop 3 => 7 over the last... 5 or 6 years. It is the best raster graphics package on the market.
As far as filters go... Everyone here's shouting 'profesionals don't use filters!', which is total BS. Unsharp mask, sharpen, gaussian blur, add noise, pixelize, all of these are filters that are used everyday by myself and the people I work with. Sure, we don't use just the filter, save and off we go, but it's just another tool, like smudge, dodge, burn or whatever.
Anyway, as much as I like Photoshop - and I work in it 6-12 hours a day, 5-6 days a week, it's still pretty weak in a lot of areas. There's *loads* to do as far layer management, symbols, etc. It's still too much of a tool, too little of a system.
The patents are on the pantone color system, which is not very useful. CMYK itself is, I believe, patent free. Someone did write a CMYK exporter, and CMYK should have full support in the next release.
Engineering and the Ultimate
First off, Photoshop is the standard because it kicks ass. I didn't mean to imply that it is the standard because it is the only program out there. But I think it is clearly the leader for professionals. And to some degree, the leader does become the defacto standard.
So you do this for a living... let's see, spending a few hundred bucks up front, verses several extra clicks for each and every manipulation you do for 8 hours a day for the next couple years. Hrmmm, not exactly a rough choice is it?
No, I don't do it for a living. And I never suggested not getting Photoshop. Read what I wrote. But do *I* need to spend the money for Photoshop? No, I don't do that for a living. Even if you are reasonably serious about image editing, The Gimp will suit you fine. I just think that people should use what suits their needs. Do I really need to spend the money for Photoshop? My answer, and I think the answer for most people, is no.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Personally, I think it's OK. I tried Photoshop once, and had trouble with it. I tried The Gimp, and had the same troubles. But I stuck with Gimp because it didn't cost me anything to do so. For Photoshop, I would have had to purchase it. That's a big investment for what I want to use it for. Most people are not power users of image editing software. In that case, the Gimp is a damn fine solution. They'll still have to learn the program though.
As for the cost of Photoshop...it's reasonable. It's a professional tool that's pretty standard. Buy it in a bundle for $1000 (or $500 educational). If you can't afford that, get Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop Elements. Considering it's pretty much a one time major expense coupled with $150 upgrades every 18-24 months, it's not a bad professional or serious hobby use cost. If all you want is to resize a pic for a background or something, obviously you don't need Photoshop. If you stand to make several thousand dollars from a project, $150 for that Photoshop 7 upgrade isn't much...having the right tools is worth quite a bit.
Wow. See, I think $500 for software is pretty expensive, especially if you are a student. Even if you are a serious hobbyist, $1000 seems like a lot of money to me. But I guess it is all relative, I could spend that much in one of my hobbies (but I try not to). So Photoshop is the tool for the pros, and The Gimp may not compare for those purposes. But how does it compare to Pint Shop Pro or Photoshop Elements? You never see any comparisons with those. I'd like to hear someone with experience evaluate these tools against each other. I agree, having the right tools is very important, but there is also tool overkill. This is where people insist on having everything top of the line, simply for the sake of having "top of the line", even if they don't have a clue why they want it.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
G 5
I've used Photoshop since version 4 (about 6 years). Photopaint and Photodeluxe before that. So yeah, I'm definitely more used to Photoshop and similar interfaces...however, that goes for most artists (my degree is in Graphic Design). GIMP is reasonably on par with Photoshop Elements for features, since Elements also doesn't deal with Channels or CMYK, and has stripped down features elsewhere (such as selection and pen tool). Paint Shop Pro I'm not sure, since I don't use it right now. But last I saw it had some good utilities for animated GIFs and such that I'm not sure if the GIMP does. $500 or $1000 doesn't just get you Photoshop, keep in mind. It also will get you Acrobat (full), Illustrator, and usually your choice of InDesign, After Effects or Premiere (or mixed and matched, depending). Consider that you then could use the apps for several years (easily) of professional work. Compare that to (potentially) several thousand dollars for a year lease of Maya or Softimage. Or $70k for a nonlinear video editing system (plus yearly maintenance). In the field of professional software, Photoshop is quite affordable. Software is just as important as hardware, and takes just as much work to make. If you can afford to go buy a $600 scanner, $400 digital camera, $1500 computer, etc then you can afford another $500 for the appropriate software. That's before the (much greater) employee cost. It's comparable to say, spending $600 on a decent guitar or mountain bike or whatever else. It's not like you need a new one every week. I agree that I see lots of people put in purchase orders for Photoshop just to use it for resizing pics to put in Powerpoint because it's the name they know. That's a waste. However, I'd say that near anyone doing reasonably serious digital art will find benefits to owning Photoshop. It's an exceedingly flexible tool, versus say, that $300 copy of MS Word.
Thanks for the info on the various products. Without having purchased them or knowing much about them, it was pretty informative. I do understand the value of good software.
It's comparable to say, spending $600 on a decent guitar or mountain bike or whatever else. It's not like you need a new one every week.
And you bought the guitar to just learn how to play "Mary had a little lamb", and you bought the mountain bike just to learn how to ride a bike. That is what some people do with Photoshop, they don't use it to its potential. That's a waste of money IMO.
However, I'd say that near anyone doing reasonably serious digital art will find benefits to owning Photoshop. It's an exceedingly flexible tool, versus say, that $300 copy of MS Word.
I think MS Word is very flexible, and you can get your money's worth out of it. At work, I use many of the features - comments, dynamic headers/footers, change tracking, etc. But at home? I think I have it installed on my Windows machine, I am not sure. I only boot it when I want to play Quake. I have OpenOffice installed on my Linux machine, but only opened it to check it out. The only time I need it is when someone sends me an attachment in doc format. I just don't compose any documents at home. I can't imagine that many people need MS Word at home. That is why most people I know have borrowed copies of Office installed at home - just in case they need it.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Philistine, real artists use an Etch-A-Sketch, with their teeth and only one eye...
OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
I discovered something else:
2) Spacebar selection positioning - When you are making a selection in Photoshop you can switch to moving the selection origin by pressing the spacebar. I use this all the time.
In the GIMP, just hold down the Alt key while you drag around. This will move the selection.
I think there's a lot of stuff like this: both tools do it, both have a convenient method, neither is terribly obvious. The result is that what you know seems easy, and what you don't know seems hard.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
In the GIMP, just hold down the Alt key while you drag around. This will move the selection.
Well, that's not quite what I meant. In PS, when you press the space key you can interactively move the selection origin. So while I am sizing a circle selection (for example) and it isn't quite where I want it, when I press space I can move it's origin. When I release space, it goes back to sizing the circle.
This seems to be extremely common for me with the circle selecter. It is nearly impossible for me to get the circle right without this feature. The same thing happens with rectangle selection but here it's usually because I change my mind about what I want while I'm doing the selection.
I would be happy to use a different key to do this in the GIMP. I just can't find it. I would also argue that not everything is just what you have learned. For example, the space key is much larger than the other keys. So there needs to be a lot of thought put into assigning the space key shortcut mapping.
Never underestimate the power of fiber.
As someone who does professional print artwork, I would disagree about the usefulness of Pantone. It is a relic of older days, but the ability to specify a colour on technology as compatible as a post-it note and see exactly that colour on the finished article is a very useful thing.
Pantone is totally irrelevant for web or screen graphics, but that isn't what it was designed for; remember, this system pre-dates desktop publishing (I was using Pantone colour swatches back when a company by the name of Aldus released this revolutionary software called "PageMaker"...).
Another point is that Pantone includes metallic finishes; these can only be faked in RGB (or CMYK colour space, for that matter), usually as grey. Without Pantone, this grey is printed as grey. What's that you say, your desktop printer doesn't do metallics? Thats why so many OSS advocates fail to understand why Photoshop wins over GIMP: lack of awareness of the needs of professional print work. I can't say to clients "sorry, I can't give you that finish because I am philosophically opposed to proprietary software"; they'd just go elsewhere.
I am sure GIMP is a wonderful tool for screen graphics, but the sad truth is that at this stage it lacks features that really are needed by some professionals. On the plus side, this is likely to improve, but only if it can be accepted that GIMP is not (yet?) all things to all people, and that philosophy must sometimes take a back seat to pragmatism.
BTW, GIMP Print must use some kind of RGB-CMYK conversion, so you are probably correct that CMYK is an open standard (although it may be patented, but probably only at the dots-on-paper level, not at the abstract colour space level, which didn't exist when CMYK print was invented).
"but only if it can be accepted that GIMP is not (yet?) all things to all people"
I think people already accept that. I really didn't see many posts at all defending GIMP for print work.
"and that philosophy must sometimes take a back seat to pragmatism"
Whether or not X is pragmatic depends entirely on one's philosophy.
Engineering and the Ultimate
make sure to give feedback and file bugs against sodipodi, contributions are welcome.
sodipodi is unfortunately probably your best bet.
however the Draw component in OpenOffice.org is very poweful.
Xfig is poweful but ugly and not really intended for artwork.
Sketch is an interesting project too especially if you like Python.
Photoshop 5 for-EVAR!!
hehe
yeah man they made some pretty peculiar changes between the time span of 5 through what.. 7 now?