5 ms·

I think the photoshop vs gimp is a bad comparison, mostly because throwing money at gimp to make it better is a bad idea. It would be better to start from scra

by bb88 9y ago

I think the photoshop vs gimp is a bad comparison, mostly because throwing money at gimp to make it better is a bad idea. It would be better to start from scratch. Now if you wanted to throw $400 for a photoshop like system to start from the ground up and work across all three platforms, I think you've got a great idea. You'd avoid the cruft, you could do subscription/pay-per-use cloud based filters, you could start with 32bits per channel from the start, instead of the slow transition to GEGL...

formula1 9y ago
Why would spending money on a brand new system with no proof of success be better than a matured application with plugin support?
- callumlocke 9y ago
  Because GIMP has a lot of baggage: a very particular UI, a community of active users (many of whom probably like it exactly how it is thanks), and a terrible name.
  - robotresearcher 9y ago
    So fork it. New name, new UI. Seashore was a try at this a decade ago. http://seashore.sourceforge.net/The_Seashore_Project/Screenshots.html http://seashore.sourceforge.net/The_Seashore_Project/Screens...
    - grogenaut 9y ago
      I think the gp's point is they'd rather rewrite than fork. If you fork you lose the other devs esp as you diverge greatly. But you get all the baggage. A lot of coders doing side projects do it for fun and to learn and that often means making their own architecture decisions (and mistakes) so they can practice that process and learn
      - robotresearcher 9y ago
        Sure. I was responding to the suggestion that the key problems with GIMP are the UI and name. The image manipulation code is surely pretty mature by now.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - jessaustin 9y ago
    The name was "terrible" right after the film "Pulp Fiction" was released. Decades later, is that still true?
    - slantyyz 9y ago
      That word existed well before Pulp Fiction. From Dictionary.com: >> Usually Disparaging and Offensive. a term used to refer to a person who limps or is lame. >> Origin >> An Americanism dating back to 1920-25; origin uncertain >> Usage note >> When describing someone who is lame, gimp is used with disparaging intent and perceived as insulting. But within the disability community, it is sometimes a term of self-reference.
    - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
      Yes. "Gimp" in UK English is not a word you say in polite company, like calling your software "slut". Sure, it's fine to speak of with a close friend but difficult to even mention to people in certain circles. I don't know what's wrong with calling it "The [GNU] Imp", an imp being like a fairy/pixy (but with a sense of mischief too), like Puck. The mascot could be kept as it fits the description imp as well as it fits anything (I've no idea after c.20 years what it's supposed to be, though I recall looking it up once). Maybe "Imp" is offensive in other languages? (Nothing other than alternate English meanings shows on Wiktionary).
  - zanny 9y ago
    This GIT thing is never going to take off because it has a lot of baggage: a very particular CLI and grammar, a community of active users (many of whom probably like it exactly how it is), and a "terrible" name.
- epicide 9y ago
  You could ask the same question comparing your project with Photoshop.
scandox 9y ago
What's wrong with GIMP? I use it every day and find it pretty good. On the MAC now it has lots of weird glitches but they seem pretty fixable...
- dsego 9y ago
  There was nothing wrong with Windows 95.
- crispyambulance 9y ago
  GIMP is perfectly fine (for many use-cases), but its not what you or I think that matters. Perhaps the best person to ask is a photoshop user who actually paid for it?
  - rgbrenner 9y ago
    I pay for creative suite. GIMP is very far behind. There are many significant core features missing, and many tools missing that make it difficult and time consuming to use. It would be more accurate to call it 'advanced paint' than photoshop. CS is expensive and I use a small part of its features... if GIMP covered just 25% of what photoshop could do, I would use it. But I think the only people who think GIMP is close to replacing it are those that have never used/learned photoshop.
    - tomc1985 9y ago
      Do you really use GIMP? Because I don't think you use it very much if you think that it is a quarter of Photoshop. Adobe regularly copies features from the GIMP, like content-aware fill
      - rgbrenner 9y ago
        I'm well aware of the status of GIMP. I first used it 15+ years ago. I used it for many years before buying PS. I last used it maybe 6 months ago. I like to check it out occasionally when my CS subscription is up for renewal. I actually pay, not just for CS, but an entire Windows computer to run it. The rest of my computers run Linux, and I use open source software everywhere. I would absolutely love to switch to GIMP, if it were at all possible.

by bb88 9y ago

formula1 9y ago

Why would spending money on a brand new system with no proof of success be better than a matured application with plugin support?

callumlocke 9y ago
Because GIMP has a lot of baggage: a very particular UI, a community of active users (many of whom probably like it exactly how it is thanks), and a terrible name.
- robotresearcher 9y ago
  So fork it. New name, new UI. Seashore was a try at this a decade ago. http://seashore.sourceforge.net/The_Seashore_Project/Screenshots.html http://seashore.sourceforge.net/The_Seashore_Project/Screens...
  - grogenaut 9y ago
    I think the gp's point is they'd rather rewrite than fork. If you fork you lose the other devs esp as you diverge greatly. But you get all the baggage. A lot of coders doing side projects do it for fun and to learn and that often means making their own architecture decisions (and mistakes) so they can practice that process and learn
    - robotresearcher 9y ago
      Sure. I was responding to the suggestion that the key problems with GIMP are the UI and name. The image manipulation code is surely pretty mature by now.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- jessaustin 9y ago
  The name was "terrible" right after the film "Pulp Fiction" was released. Decades later, is that still true?
  - slantyyz 9y ago
    That word existed well before Pulp Fiction. From Dictionary.com: >> Usually Disparaging and Offensive. a term used to refer to a person who limps or is lame. >> Origin >> An Americanism dating back to 1920-25; origin uncertain >> Usage note >> When describing someone who is lame, gimp is used with disparaging intent and perceived as insulting. But within the disability community, it is sometimes a term of self-reference.
  - pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    Yes. "Gimp" in UK English is not a word you say in polite company, like calling your software "slut". Sure, it's fine to speak of with a close friend but difficult to even mention to people in certain circles. I don't know what's wrong with calling it "The [GNU] Imp", an imp being like a fairy/pixy (but with a sense of mischief too), like Puck. The mascot could be kept as it fits the description imp as well as it fits anything (I've no idea after c.20 years what it's supposed to be, though I recall looking it up once). Maybe "Imp" is offensive in other languages? (Nothing other than alternate English meanings shows on Wiktionary).
- zanny 9y ago
  This GIT thing is never going to take off because it has a lot of baggage: a very particular CLI and grammar, a community of active users (many of whom probably like it exactly how it is), and a "terrible" name.
epicide 9y ago
You could ask the same question comparing your project with Photoshop.

scandox 9y ago

What's wrong with GIMP? I use it every day and find it pretty good. On the MAC now it has lots of weird glitches but they seem pretty fixable...

dsego 9y ago
There was nothing wrong with Windows 95.
crispyambulance 9y ago
GIMP is perfectly fine (for many use-cases), but its not what you or I think that matters. Perhaps the best person to ask is a photoshop user who actually paid for it?
- rgbrenner 9y ago
  I pay for creative suite. GIMP is very far behind. There are many significant core features missing, and many tools missing that make it difficult and time consuming to use. It would be more accurate to call it 'advanced paint' than photoshop. CS is expensive and I use a small part of its features... if GIMP covered just 25% of what photoshop could do, I would use it. But I think the only people who think GIMP is close to replacing it are those that have never used/learned photoshop.
  - tomc1985 9y ago
    Do you really use GIMP? Because I don't think you use it very much if you think that it is a quarter of Photoshop. Adobe regularly copies features from the GIMP, like content-aware fill
    - rgbrenner 9y ago
      I'm well aware of the status of GIMP. I first used it 15+ years ago. I used it for many years before buying PS. I last used it maybe 6 months ago. I like to check it out occasionally when my CS subscription is up for renewal. I actually pay, not just for CS, but an entire Windows computer to run it. The rest of my computers run Linux, and I use open source software everywhere. I would absolutely love to switch to GIMP, if it were at all possible.