Slashdot Mirror
A Gimp In Photoshop's Clothing
comforteagle writes "Scott Moschella, from Attack of the Show!, set out to make The Gimp a little friendlier with a simple UI make-over, creating GimpShop. Despite an outcry from some developers, users have picked it up with passion. Howard Wen has interviewed Scott about why he did this. From the interview: 'I've always thought that GIMP was just as powerful as Photoshop. My way of proving it was to make GIMP work as close to Photoshop as I possibly could, given my limited programming experience.' As more Windows/Mac users discover powerful open source applications are they bound (slashdot disc.) to make more discoveries of this kind?" Update: 09/16 18:48 GMT by Z : Some users have pointed out this is basically an update to a previous discussion we've had. Link added for the sake of completeness.
Powerful open source applications? Have you tried doing anything in GIMP on a Macintosh? It will only run through Apple's X11.app, and it makes a 386 running Windows XP look fast. I was so disappointed by the performance I bought Photoshop Elements for Mac on eBay (it only cost me $30 though... well worth the price.)
Ok, I admit, when I first started using the gimp I had just come over from Photoshop, so it was a little wierd. The UI was, in short, different. But I've been using it more and more in recent times, and as I've gotten into it, I find it to be much more intuitive than Photoshop's interface. At least for me. I like the shortcuts, I like the right clicking menus, I like the multiple windows, etc... Everytime I go back to Photoshop (because I'm forced to, not because I want to) I find more reasons to like the gimp.
-=JML=-
It could use a bit of an overhaul on the interface. It's not very intuitive to use. It would be nice if you could get a version of GIMP that was designed more for the idiot^H^H^H^H^Hnovice user for quick touchups, without all the extras cluttering up the interface.
My software never has bugs.
It just develops random features.
The GIMP has its own interface. If someone is throwing a PS interface onto the GIMP to prove a point about its functionality, I would hardly call that "ripping off".
This is why I think applications should be built in stages. Using letter writing as an example. You could have the same basic framwork go from:
Note pad -> Word pad -> Word -> Word Publishing
Why not have the gimp frame work able to go from a basic Paint application to a full featured artisic tool. Or from a basic photo touch up with resize and redeye reduction to a full scale photo manipulation.
Why don't OS developers see that they could not only skin the looks of the application but the features as well.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
IMO, the goal isn't to please people with a new interface, but rather to give something people are used to. I use an old version of Photoshop (5.5) fairly regularly, so I'm used to its interface. When I switched over to the Gimp recently to do some work with transparent PNG's, I had an extremely difficult time getting around. Had I known about this at the time, I would have probably used this instead.
Go, and never darken my towels again! -- Rufus
When the GIMP has:
1) CMYK support;
2) Channel math;
3) Industry standard color engine and ICC profile support;
4) Channel mixer;
5) Equal control over color adjustment modes
and a bunch of other shit, then the GIMP will be as powerful as Photoshop. Until then, it's a silly statement to make. While 50% of the people who use Photoshop can very probably do the exact same things with the GIMP, for the 50% who really push Photoshop there is no substitute. And, as you climb higher on that curve to the people who are really stretching Photoshop on a daily basis (mainly very high level retouchers/digital artists) it is quite literally the only tool for the job.
This is one of those time I think open source cheerleading is not a good thing. Just because it's an open source digital image editing program doesn't mean it's the same thing as Adobe's flagship product.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
Wasn't it Apple/Microsoft that had the court battle that decided look and feel were not something you could copywrite?
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
If you want to truly compete with Photoshop and other programs, you have to compete on two fronts - interface and functionality. The interface has to be usable by people on the entry-level for their tasks, and it can't get in the way of pros for theirs. If you want to compete with Photoshop, you're also competing with a massive amount of functionality wrapped in a passable but very refined interface.
The low-end is saturated with dozens of products, but especially Adobe's own Photoshop Elements (which people here like to ignore, probably because it usually costs $35 - it's easier to attack "a thousand dollars Canadian"). On the high-end, you have professionals with very exacting requirements and no time for hassles. These people live for 5-second reductions in processing time because they do it constantly. Anything that causes them to slow down even the tiniest bit will be a deal-breaker. The interface must be completely fluid.
Most open source projects aren't necessarily strapped for cash, but rather they have little focus or centralized planning. They suffer either from feature creep and bloated interfaces that make no sense, or a dearth of features due to lack of desire to implement what other people want. Cash won't make a bit of difference if the developers don't have focus, and I don't see that kind of emphasis on quality and interface refinement in the Gimp. "Good enough" isn't good enough.
I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
Odd....wonder why they haven't sued Jasc for PaintShop Pro ...
Make America grate again!
I've downloaded GIMP... had no idea what to do with it so after a couple sessions of randomly pushing buttons left it sit to gather stray 0s and 1s that collect on my HDD much like the dust gathers on my Windows 95 MCP book.
If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"