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.
I love gimp but I always felt that the interface was a little strange. I am glad that somebody is looking into making using the gimp a little more user friendly. However I don't think ripping off PhotoShop is the best way to do that as I'm not super fond of the PhotoShop interface either.
My way of proving it was to make GIMP work as close to Photoshop as I possibly could, given my limited programming experience.
/passes out
With Photoshop weighing in at over a thousand dollars Canadian, let me just say that anything that resembles it moderately, without the strange behaviour of PaintShop, is welcomed. Free too?
It's funny because I can remember thinking about this the other day, and wondering when companies are going to start investing in the future of office systems, to help reduce their own long-term bottom line. If everyone donates $100 to the Gimp/Gimpshop project(s), just imagine the money saving that would come out of it! I would be willing to bet that if this happened, in less than five years open source would outpace Adobe in quality and reliability. The reason most people use Photoshop is for quality and reliability -- not necessarily features as you might expect. It does what I need better than anything else yet, but with some time, effort and financial backing, we'll see superior products come out of the open source community.
Open source needs a well of cash to draw from. I suggest a foundation be made to fund open source projects better than we've seen. Apply and they bankroll your project if you've got something hot. I'd like to see that work on a large scale and I often wonder why SourceForge doesn't take that approach, in favour of small donations to each project on a case-by-case level. I'd love to apply for financing for my crazy open source ideas! It's the money factor that slows me down. I don't have time to pursue it very well because I have to pay bills.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
The only reason I don't use the gimp is because I can't be bothered to learn a new interface. I keep hitting Photoshop's shortcut keys expecting them to work and its frustrating not knowing where all of the menu & tool bar items are.
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
To borrow a quote from elsewhere: "If you build it, they will come."
One of Adobe's Lawyers (from their Barrel O' Lawyers): Your Honor, in the defendent's own words:
Judge: I have no recourse other than to find for the plaintiff and wreak all sorts of havoc with Open Source Development.A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
On what you call friendly. I'm sure some people out there would prefer a graphics editor without a GUI.
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=-
Free too? /passes out
I'd figure someone as old as you (uid 56!!) would know that it's "/me passes out"...
I don't get it, why does it seem so many alt-os projects are forever trying to emulate the look and feel of a Windows environment?
Linspire, KDE, GIMP, and others, if you spent the time improving, not cloning, your application, perhaps you'd get more users.
I mean really, if your app is going to look, feel, and function, like a Windows one, why should I use yours??
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
Wow, way to pimp out your own website when you could have just direct linked to the Paint.NET Website.
To me, the show-stoppers for using Linux/Gimp for my photo work are the following:
* Color management. Not aware of ICC color profiling. Can I calibrate my monitor with nVideo and ATI Linux drivers? Can Gimp load an ICC profile of my output device to proof my print?
* Multi-processor support. Photoshop takes advantage of my dual-core machine.
* Large files. Photoshop loads and processes 1 GB image files much faster than Gimp. With my 4x5" large-format camera and a 2400dpi film scanner, my image files are 100 megapixels.
For those not aware, you can change the shortcuts in gimp to whatever you want. Some people have already made the photoshop shortcuts for you. So all you have to do is download the gimp-photoshop shortcut file and you're set.
cl
Reply . . . let's get it over with.
Are you on Windows? You have to bare in mind that the GIMP interface was mostly designed for focus-follows-mouse, the traditional focus policy on X11. I have used The GIMP on Windows and it is a pain compared to Linux/X11 because of the different focus policies. It also helps if you have multiple virtual desktops, so you can have a seperate, clean desktop (or several) for working with The GIMP and not clutter the image windows with lots of other windows. I guess this is why people keep whinging for an MDI interface.
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.
The gimp pretty much pisses all over the gnome HIG. I think it is very difficult to use for newbies and/or people used to use photoshop. They seem to completelly ignore all we know about usability and human computer interfaces.
This development and the reaction that people are having to it can be a wake up call for the gimp developers. They may realize their interface could use some work. Kind of like KDE is reacting now that GNOME is doing so well on usability. In my mind, this should benefits the gimp
I really hope they take a constructive attitude towards this one and take a look at why people are liking this.
This is old news. Everyone on OSX has moved on to using Seashore which is the GIMP is a nice slick OSX package, native Aqua/OSX windows, and overall just a better program. Check it out.
It's been a few months since I've seen this on Slashdot (please correct me if this isn't the same gimp-photoshop hack).
Despite an outcry from some developers, users have picked it up with passion.
As I recall, the developers were upset because of the way he went about makeing Gimp look like Photoshop. Rather than making changes to the data files that are used to create the menus, he changed to programing itself. This (going by memory) broke foreign language support. As I recall, Scott wrote the Gimp team and sent his suggestions. The Gimp team wrote back and invited him to join a discustion group. However, Scott decided to fork Gimp and make the changes himself. This of course leaves maintenance up to Scott. I hope he's up to it.
Request a Linux Shockwave player here: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/
Some of the reactions:
It's worse than that. While I'm usually not a fan of changing things around for the sake of being PC, calling a program "The Gimp" is downright offensive. This is particularly a problem when needing to describe or advocate for the program to health professionals (particularly those in the mental health or rehabilitative fields).
The shame of this is that those very people are working with tax payer money which would be better spent on something other than photoshop, but are going to be turned off by a name such as "The GIMP", just as they would be if it was called "The Cripple" or "The Retard"
none.
Our "computer programs law" explicitly excludes "similarity from a preexisting program functionality" from copyright protection, and our patents law explicitly excludes computer programs, methods and algorithms, from patent protection.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
A little recognition that users matter would go a long way. I'd be willing to try alternative skins on top of GIMP.
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
Would it be more accurate to say that I removed my illegal, pirated version of Photoshop now that I have GimpShop?
Makes more sense than saying I threw away my $800 legal copy of Photoshop now that I have GimpShop for free.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
It's worse than that. While I'm usually not a fan of changing things around for the sake of being PC, calling a program "The Gimp" is downright offensive.
You sound like the people calling for firing the official in DC who used the word "niggardly".
Do you also object to the phrases "spic and span" and "a chink in the armor"?
"gimp" means beautiful or attractive, and has meant that for far longer than it's been used as slang for the handicapped. Presumably the makers of an image manipulation program had that meaning in mind.
rage, rage against the dying of the light
I agree, I always thought The Gimp was such a gay name.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
Yes, it is an acronym. The program name was either formatted purposely to get comething the originator(s) thought was cute, or, when the acronym was pointed out (probably immediately on naming) to them, went, "Hehheh, Cool" and ignored it.
If I came up with a mathematics program, and called it "Coordinated Unit Normalized Tester" and then expected colleges and corporations to adopt it, you'd laugh. Why is this different?
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
I just recently bought CS2 (after using elements for a while) so my list won't for sure be exhaustive.
= adjustment layers (this feature alone makes gimp a toy in my book)
= healing brush/spot healing brush (use it all the time)
= adobe bridge + adobe camera raw (and don't tell me there are other apps to do this, I know there are, but acr+bridge is amazing in CS2)
= liquify
= 16 and 32 bit/channel images (I do all my editing in 16 personally)
= CYMK/LAB/... color spaces
= color profiles (so I can soft-proof exactly what my print will look like when printed at the lab *AND* can use their profiles instead of having to limit myself to sRGB)
= vanishing point (ok, gimmicky but it's quite useful sometimes)
= multiple easily placeable color samplers
= an actually good UI without 250000 extra windows: in PS I can just press 'tab' and work on the imace on an empty screen, 'tab' again and all my palettes are back where they were.
= history brush
= better support for my wacom tablet (although the gimp is not totally bad, it's still nowhere near as good)
= meaningful keyboard shortcuts for everything.
and the list goes on and on and on. I am very much pro open source, but when it comes to the Gimp the people that say that it's as good as PS strike me the same way as the people that say that their webserver written in perl in a CS class is as good as Apache.
Sure, the gimp is fine for the 'resize the pic for the web and maybe correct some red eye' crowd, but as soon as you have to do something more involved even the humble (and cheap) PS Elements is light years ahead.
-- the cake is a lie
Unfortunately most GUI apps are poorly designed such that the front-end and back-end code are tangled together. If programmers would create the back-end as a discrete entity GUI apps would be much more flexible and stable.
One thing I really hate is when you load a big file and the entire interface freezes while the file loads. Argh! ICQ always did that on my contact list. Horribly coded.
There is no reason why a well designed app shouldn't be portable to different UI's ranging from text based on up. Why not have a text-based version of GIMP or OpenOffice that lets you manipulate the files using command-line commands? Functionality should not be based on the UI.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.