- Messages
- 4,641
- Name
- Duncan
- Edit My Images
- No
It fails to run. So Gimp leaves it in the dust.
How do you mean: "It fails to run"?
It fails to run. So Gimp leaves it in the dust.
It won't run on my OS.
I don't use any version as they say it won't run. But I'm okay with Gimp.
The OS is Kubuntu. Adobe says they only support Mac and Windows I thought.
Let's hope your old lawnmower is compatible with all types of lawn then. "Error. Wrong grass type detected. Please change your lawn to proceed"
Do you really expect them to support every flavour of every variant of PC OS you can think of? Really really?Yes. Complain and they'll blame the user. So best to do what they say.
What can PS do that GIMP can't or can't do with a script or addon?Do you really expect them to support every flavour of every variant of PC OS you can think of? Really really?
You're clearly not bothered, which is fine. But claiming Gimp is as powerful as photoshop is plain misleading.
Smart objects & adjustment layers?What can PS do that GIMP can't or can't do with a script or addon?
Besides costing you a lot of money...lol
Not the version I've got - 2.8.14GIMP does that, anything else?
Do you have the PS ui version of GIMP? if not you can get it free. You can also search for any additional features you need, with millions of developers, you are almost sure to find what you want because someone else wanted it first and solved it for you, that's the beauty of the GNU license.
Adobe has a couple dozen guys working on PS, do you really think they can possibly put in an equal number of man hours into that project that the millions of developers put into GIMP?
It would take millions of years, I don't want to wait that long.
The 'released version' of GIMP accepts coding in C, C++, Perl, Python, Scheme, and others. It also accepts the thousands of plugins that are available, it also allows for far more flexibility than PS ever could, and when it comes to software, flexibility and open source=power that can't be matched by proprietary software.
There is no trick, just search for what you want and as always in any endeavor, read, read, read, and learn. The more you know about software the more you can do with it and GNU license software is unlimited.
And therein lies the root problem with much open source software. The stuff is mainly there if you can find the good stuff in all the piles of rubbish, and find the particular variant which works how you want it too. And then work out how to set it up and navigate a non-standard UI. Then you still have to learn how to use the tools which are available to accomplish the effect you're after - that's true of Photoshop too of course - but there are an awful lot more Photoshop tutorials available than there are for Gimp.
Post-processing is difficult enough to learn without increasing the barrier to entry. Gimp is acceptable when no other option is available due to budget or OS constraints but it's a last resort.
Not the version I've got - 2.8.14
The PS UI version might do it - I didn't even know it existed.
And therein lies the root problem with much open source software. The stuff is mainly there if you can find the good stuff in all the piles of rubbish, and find the particular variant which works how you want it too. And then work out how to set it up and navigate a non-standard UI. Then you still have to learn how to use the tools which are available to accomplish the effect you're after - that's true of Photoshop too of course - but there are an awful lot more Photoshop tutorials available than there are for Gimp.
I should have known better than to weigh in to another free-vs-proprietary software debate. I've also broken my own rule of not engaging in discussion until I've seen some work by those involved.
I wouldn't have bothered but for the fact that I'm convinced advising beginners to photography and image processing to start with Gimp is bad advice. For most beginners on Windows or Mac one or more of Elements, Affiinity and Lightroom is the simplest starting point.
Post-processing is difficult enough to learn without increasing the barrier to entry. Gimp is acceptable when no other option is available due to budget or OS constraints but it's a last resort.
Because Gimp doesn't all of the features of photoshop doesn't mean it is a barrier to entry. When you start you don't need adjustment layers and de haze anyway. And PS didn't always have them either.Post-processing is difficult enough to learn without increasing the barrier to entry. Gimp is acceptable when no other option is available due to budget or OS constraints but it's a last resort.
Because Gimp doesn't all of the features of photoshop doesn't mean it is a barrier to entry. When you start you don't need adjustment layers and de haze anyway. And PS didn't always have them either. I'm sure you are going to continue to recommend PS anyway. But because you hadn't heard of something, doesn't mean it's an inherent flaw with open source software. Especially as you are likely to spread the word about Adobe products, and keep hush about the open source ones. (apologies if I misunderstood your post) As such you are perpetuating the problem you were complaining about. I don't mean to take sides in the open versus proprietary debate either. All I'm saying is each program, not forgetting Darktable and LightZone too, has its advantages and disadvantages.
Not the version I've got - 2.8.14
The PS UI version might do it - I didn't even know it existed.
And therein lies the root problem with much open source software. The stuff is mainly there if you can find the good stuff in all the piles of rubbish, and find the particular variant which works how you want it too. And then work out how to set it up and navigate a non-standard UI. Then you still have to learn how to use the tools which are available to accomplish the effect you're after - that's true of Photoshop too of course - but there are an awful lot more Photoshop tutorials available than there are for Gimp.
I should have known better than to weigh in to another free-vs-proprietary software debate. I've also broken my own rule of not engaging in discussion until I've seen some work by those involved.
I wouldn't have bothered but for the fact that I'm convinced advising beginners to photography and image processing to start with Gimp is bad advice. For most beginners on Windows or Mac one or more of Elements, Affiinity and Lightroom is the simplest starting point.
Post-processing is difficult enough to learn without increasing the barrier to entry. Gimp is acceptable when no other option is available due to budget or OS constraints but it's a last resort.
Unique is the wrong word. There are many people on TP who use Linux and others who have stated they would use Linux if Lightroom ran on it. So you see the effect it is having. And then others spread misinformation. Sneer and compare Kubuntu to an old lawnmower. And others have never heard of the alternatives to both OS and application options for reasons we've just heard.Ian, you're in a fairly "unique" (on this forum) situation in that you're using an OS that Adobe doesn't support. As such, you "need" to use other software to meet your needs. For those using an OS that Adobe does support, unless a person feels a need to make a moral stand against Adobe, there's really no reason to use Gimp or other freeware, especially when you can pick up a copy of PS7 for a tenner. There's a reason that most advanced photographers use Adobe products and I think it would be doing many a disservice to call them sheep. Back in the day, us MAC users were the "rebels". I was the "Paul Newman" of computers, without a cause.. Rebel all you like, use whichever OS floats your boat, but Adobe LR & PS are very good products and when folks here ask for PP help, that's what most people will be using, not Gimp.
Unique is the wrong word. There are many people on TP who use Linux and others who have stated they would use Linux if Lightroom ran on it. So you see the effect it is having. And then others spread misinformation. Sneer and compare Kubuntu to an old lawnmower. And others have never heard of the alternatives to both OS and application options for reasons we've just heard.
It is good for everyone if people use a variety of programs and pick the thing that suits them. It's good for Adobe users too when that happens.
Not the version I've got - 2.8.14
The PS UI version might do it - I didn't even know it existed.
And therein lies the root problem with much open source software. The stuff is mainly there if you can find the good stuff in all the piles of rubbish, and find the particular variant which works how you want it too. And then work out how to set it up and navigate a non-standard UI. Then you still have to learn how to use the tools which are available to accomplish the effect you're after - that's true of Photoshop too of course - but there are an awful lot more Photoshop tutorials available than there are for Gimp.
I should have known better than to weigh in to another free-vs-proprietary software debate. I've also broken my own rule of not engaging in discussion until I've seen some work by those involved.
I wouldn't have bothered but for the fact that I'm convinced advising beginners to photography and image processing to start with Gimp is bad advice. For most beginners on Windows or Mac one or more of Elements, Affiinity and Lightroom is the simplest starting point.
Post-processing is difficult enough to learn without increasing the barrier to entry. Gimp is acceptable when no other option is available due to budget or OS constraints but it's a last resort for me.
The stuff is mainly there if you can find the good stuff in all the piles of rubbish, and find the particular variant which works how you want it too. And then work out how to set it up and navigate a non-standard UI. Then you still have to learn how to use the tools which are available to accomplish the effect you're after - that's true of Photoshop too of course - but there are an awful lot more Photoshop tutorials available than there are for Gimp.
I can go a month without using PS, and it's still a bargainWhich, for many, is still 1 pound per use and not worth it.
Yes I can see what you are saying. But think about how some others, who are less informed, will see your comment.Ian, that made no sense at all. And if you read my post again (or any of my previous posts on the subject) you will conclude I'm not one to sneer, nor have I sneered; just stated my opinion.
Yes. Just to refresh, different people have different needs. Some do recommend that Photoshop is the only appropriate option without checking the persons situation.I can go a month without using PS, and it's still a bargain
It's true if you need to have your hand held you will have to pay for a nanny, no way around that.
That's a nice sneer you have there, sir, but I don't think it's going to win many friends to the world of non-proprietary software.
It's true if you need to have your hand held you will have to pay for a nanny, no way around that.
I've also broken my own rule of not engaging in discussion until I've seen some work by those involved.
I'm pretty sure this is Richard C Jones back again, in which case it's unlikely we can expect either reasoning, helpful critique or accepting of critique from others.
Ignore was probably the correct thing to do.
Because Gimp doesn't all of the features of photoshop doesn't mean it is a barrier to entry. When you start you don't need adjustment layers and de haze anyway. And PS didn't always have them either.
I'm sure you are going to continue to recommend PS anyway. But because you hadn't heard of something, doesn't mean it's an inherent flaw with open source software. Especially as you are likely to spread the word about Adobe products, and keep hush about the open source ones. (apologies if I misunderstood your post) As such you are perpetuating the problem you were complaining about. I don't mean to take sides in the open versus proprietary debate either. All I'm saying is each program, not forgetting Darktable and LightZone too, has its advantages and disadvantages.
That is not a problem with the software it's a problem with the users, they have become used to being lazy and not doing anything for themselves. If you don't want to be a part of the experience then stay with the proprietary stuff and get less power and less money for the things in life that matter like family and loved ones.
GIMPshop has the same features as GIMP but it tries to make it simpler for the crowd that can't code and doesn't like to learn new things, so it puts things where you might be able to find it easier based on muscle memory.
GIMP was the first editing software I ever used, and will probably be the last, but there have been a ton of others in between such as PS, PP, Phirea, Pixia, etc. None of the paid software has the same power that I get from GNU software.
I like more power and more say so over what I do when editing than most users do though.
The fact that it doesn't have adjustment layers means it's a non starter. I never process an image in PS without using adjustment layers so waste of time for me even if I was interested.
But I and millions of others like being lazy. I don't want to search for plugins and any other crap to make something do something. It have all I want in what I have and will always recommend PS to someone starting out. And if they said what about gimp I would tell them to do themselves a favour and forget it. And for 99.9% of those people I would have given them the right advice.
Great for you. As long as you don't think that everyone has the same needs, and you check out what suits them, and you know all about Gimp and the other alternatives, then fine.It have all I want in what I have and will always recommend PS to someone starting out. And if they said what about gimp I would tell them to do themselves a favour and forget it. And for 99.9% of those people I would have given them the right advice.