Slashdot Mirror
Gimp Hits 2.0
jf writes "Gimp 2.0 released! From gimp.org: "This release is a major event, marking the end of a three year development cycle by a group of volunteers and enthusiasts who have made this the most professional release of the GIMP ever. It is the first stable release that is officially supported not only on Unix-based operating systems, but also on Microsoft Windows and Macintosh OS X." Get it from ftp.gimp.org or from the mirror sites."
If it's officially supported - where's the Windows binary then? :-?
Last time I checked, MacOS X was at least as "Unix-Based" (darwin) as Linux, if not more...
I was offered a penny for my thoughts, so I gave my two cents... I got ripped off!
Yeah, I will finally get to know how to use it eaither. These floating window schema was the dummiest thing ever. Well, actually now there is Sun LookingGlass... DIA could do the same,
Photoshop is definitely much better and more mature than the Gimp, but it comes with a $600 pricetag. The Gimp starts to become more of an option when you don't have to use some of the more intensive photoshop filters. (So people actually do pay for photoshop, enough-so that Adobe had some good earnings this quarter).
no reason to knock the gimp. It has an amazing cost to ability ratio.
For the same reason it dosn't serve web pages. It is not a drawing tool, it is an Image Manipulation Program. Not that I would mind if they addedd better drawing functionality.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
I'm a graphic artist and I use gimp and photoshop, along with opencanvas, illustrator and painter. They are all essential parts of my work. Gimp may not be as good as photoshop, but I use it for small effects because I like the look it achieves. It's kind of like using a ballpoint pen instead of a pencil. Sure, graphite pencils or quality brush pens are better, but the look of ballpoint can't be duplicated by anything else.
Really though, you probably don't really understand why photoshop is better than gimp to begin with. You probably like it because of the crappy filters and effects that come with it, but those are a total joke to anyone slightly professional. Everyone who is serious uses his own custom brushes and textures, and I use photoshop the most because of the power it has over brush controls (especially with my wacom tablet). Gimp still has it's place though, and it's an important one.
It's not just me, either. There are several other artists in my studio who use gimp all the time, too.
"I have no graphics experience whatsoever."
That's probably a good thing.. That way you're not stuck thinking, "hmph.. that's not how photoshop does it."
"You need CMYK? CODE it or PAY someone to do it for you."
But isn't that what he's doing by paying for a commerical application (Photoshop in this case)?
"Open source is not about getting stuff for free, but giving and receiving."
At the risk of being called flamebait, that won't do spit of good toward a true Desktop Linux end-user solution. Those of us developing software can give as well as take. But Joe End-User just wants to get their job done. Take take take. The mantra of the end-user.
And that's exactly what desktop linux is going to have to address, heck embrace.
It is the first stable release that is officially supported not only on Unix-based operating systems, but also on Microsoft Windows and Macintosh OS X.
That's like saying that it's supported not only on Windows, but on Windows 98. Mac OS X IS a Unix based operating system.
Um, I'm a web designer. How is that invaluable?
I think you're eating too much of the hamburger that Adobe is feeding you with buzzwords like that.
Gimp creates jpegs just fine. If you require ultimate fine-grained control over image creation then I'd wager:
Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary
I'd like to point out that for the price of Photshop (which is a very good program) you can get Photoshop+Gimp. So why put down the GIMP?
I'll agree with that.
Every time that there is a post about a gimp upgrade on slashdot, the posts degenerate into photoshop vs. gimp debates.
Seriously, who cares? Some of us don't run windows, and every version of Photoshop after 8 or so doesn't run worth a crap in Wine; so we use what works best in Linux, which is Gimp. Windows users can use Photoshop. Sure, it's better in a lot of ways - I won't argue that - but you use the best tool you have. Personally I will never have another windows installation on my systems, for many reasons. So.... Gimp for me. It works for what I do (texture creation for 3d models).
I'd like to see a post on
So much to ask?
SB
It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
If you prefer Adobe to Gimp, that's great too... buy it and use it. Judge the tradeoffs in cost and functionality for yourself and choose the best tool for you.
-1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
So basically you have no insight here or have even used Gimp 2.0. You just felt like being a troll?
I swear Adobe users are some of the biggest Trolls I've met on the Net. Everywhere I go where someone dares to mention an alternative, the Adobe trolls freak out and show up in massive numbers to diss anything non-Adobe. If it wasn't cmyk it would just be some other thing.
Why can't you Photoshop snobs just accept the fact that Gimp is a decent image editor that differs from Photoshop and leave it at that. Why are you so freaking insulted that non-Adobe products are available? You have stock in Adobe or something?
Gimp is certainly the best Free image editor available and for home users it will do anything you could possibly want, especially when it comes to digital photography.
But then again I guess I'm just wasting my breath.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
As another web designer, I feel I should make a point. First of all, I don't know what mask thingy compression stuff is. Except what the earlier post told me. I don't use Photoshop CS, I still use 7, and it does fine for me. I have to say, though, $2-$3 is NOT all that much money. But bear one thing in mind. That's PER IMAGE. If you have 10 images like that, that's $20 - $30 a day, which is starting to add up.
Better compression is ALWAYS good. If you run a site that uses a lot of images (Gallery, porn site, whatever) then the cost saving in better compression could be HUGE, and if it doesn't take any longer (or much longer) to do, then it's basically free money.
Also, on the 1 second thing... yeah, one second is not long, but once again, that's one second PER IMAGE. It all adds up.
Oh, and just so I get to put forth my opinion. The release of any new software like Gimp is always good. I'm a Photoshop guy and have neither reason nor inclination to change, but Gimp provides particularly programmers, and low end designers a free way to achieve the simple tasks they require. Its not worth a $600 photoshop license to make buttons. Sure, it's not Photoshop, but it doesn't have to be.