wayne wrote:

http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/03/07/1813207

Saw the above article on Newsforge.

Well, it shows that the author doesn't read the OpenUsability forum. Of course, this makes it a suitable article for NewsForged, but without proof for the authors claims it is worthless.

I'd highly recommend and appreciate it if anyone who wants to participate in the discussion that will take place in this thread reads the relevant sources (OpenUsability forum, GIMP mailing list archives, news group and Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop) himself and in whole. Thank you.

Michael

Michael Schumacher wrote:

Well, it shows that the author doesn't read the OpenUsability forum. Of course, this makes it a suitable article for NewsForged, but without proof for the authors claims it is worthless.

I don't dispute this, but I think a more fundamental issue has been raised in the article, which comes up time and time again on Gimp lists and in other Gimp criticism. That issue is: Gimp does not look or behave like PhotoShop. As a result, people think it's doomed to fail simply because it's not PhotoShop.

If folks want to use Pixel, which emulates PhotoShop, by all means let them. What I didn't like about the article is the author equates PhotoShop look/feel with "usability". Many Gimp users find Gimp *very* usable and functional given what it can do. Gimp's functionality is separate from its UI and I think it's wrong to judge Gimp's functionality based on its UI (which doesn't necessarily mean the UI is horrible even though many think it is).

I mentioned before I once got into a Gimp UI debate with someone who slammed Gimp's UI but also felt PhotoShop's UI was just as bad. I think those who claim Gimp has a "bad" UI yet suggest adopting a PhotoShop UI are still missing the target. If the idea is to come up with a "good" UI for Gimp, that is where the focus should be instead of swapping one arguably bad UI with another arguably bad UI simply because it's well known.

Thanks to wayne for posting the link. :)

Peace...

Tom

On Saturday 11 March 2006 17:00, Michael Schumacher wrote:

wayne wrote:

http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/03/07/1813207

Saw the above article on Newsforge.

Well, it shows that the author doesn't read the OpenUsability forum. Of course, this makes it a suitable article for NewsForged, but without proof for the authors claims it is worthless.

I'd highly recommend and appreciate it if anyone who wants to participate in the discussion that will take place in this thread reads the relevant sources (OpenUsability forum, GIMP mailing list archives, news group and Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop) himself and in whole. Thank you.

Michael

There has been a history of Gimp leadership downplaying the needs of the DTP world. In particular the CMYK color model has been avoided. Now there is (slow) movement in that direction, but CMS profiles are needed as well.

Meanwhile other products are coming to the fore that have CMYK and CMS capabalities from the start. Among products usable today there is Inkscape the drawing program and Scribus, which is more of a Quark replacement.

But a more direct alternative in terms of replacing Gimp functionality is Krita, part of the Koffice site but not normally distributed with it. Krita is buggier than a summer picnic and crashes are frequent. But development is proceeding rapidly and the feature set is already impressive. It calls itself a "painting and image editing" program, which is Gimp territory to be sure. And one of the principal developers asked me what plug ins I especially liked in Gimp, to give him some rainy day projects. And it already has CMYK and CMS profiles.

By no means am I ready to jump ship. But I keep my eyes on these other alternatives. Gimp either meets the DTP challenge or will have to face a Photoshop port or clone someday. And keep an eye on Krita.

In the meantime Inkscape and Scribus have a symbiotic relationship. Both are pretty stable. Both can handle the CMYK color model. The combined functionality is pretty good. Not Gimp-level to be sure, but improving.

-- John Culleton Books with answers to marketing and publishing questions: http://wexfordpress.com/tex/shortlist.pdf

Book coaches, consultants and packagers: http://wexfordpress.com/tex/packagers.pdf

On Saturday 11 March 2006 18:39, John R. Culleton wrote:

On Saturday 11 March 2006 17:00, Michael Schumacher wrote:

wayne wrote:

http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/03/07/1813207

Saw the above article on Newsforge.

Well, it shows that the author doesn't read the OpenUsability forum. Of course, this makes it a suitable article for NewsForged, but without proof for the authors claims it is worthless.

I'd highly recommend and appreciate it if anyone who wants to participate in the discussion that will take place in this thread reads the relevant sources (OpenUsability forum, GIMP mailing list archives, news group and Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop) himself and in whole. Thank you.

Michael

There has been a history of Gimp leadership downplaying the needs of the DTP world. In particular the CMYK color model has been avoided. Now there is (slow) movement in that direction, but CMS profiles are needed as well.

Meanwhile other products are coming to the fore that have CMYK and CMS capabalities from the start. Among products usable today there is Inkscape the drawing program and Scribus, which is more of a Quark replacement.

But a more direct alternative in terms of replacing Gimp functionality is Krita, part of the Koffice site but not normally distributed with it. Krita is buggier than a summer picnic and crashes are frequent. But development is proceeding rapidly and the feature set is already impressive. It calls itself a "painting and image editing" program, which is Gimp territory to be sure. And one of the principal developers asked me what plug ins I especially liked in Gimp, to give him some rainy day projects. And it already has CMYK and CMS profiles.

By no means am I ready to jump ship. But I keep my eyes on these other alternatives. Gimp either meets the DTP challenge or will have to face a Photoshop port or clone someday. And keep an eye on Krita.

Totally agree with this post. When Krita matures, Gimp is going to have some insane competition.

Hi,

"John R. Culleton" writes:

There has been a history of Gimp leadership downplaying the needs of the DTP world. In particular the CMYK color model has been avoided. Now there is (slow) movement in that direction, but CMS profiles are needed as well.

There has been what? I have been pushing the introduction of color management using ICC profiles for quite a while. The need for other color models and high color depths has been acknowledged years ago when we decided that we need to redesign the GIMP core to be able to handle all this. I have been supporting anyone who has expressed his/her interest to work on the GIMP code.

Sorry, but we haven't been downplaying. We are simply only a handful of developers who happen to have a full-time job, a real life and only a limited amount of time that we cannot put into improving GIMP. I would love to be able to work on more drastic changes, but currently my time is pretty much eaten by maintaining the current code, dealing with bug reports, applying patches, helping occasional contributors and sometimes even writing some code that will hopefully bring us closer to the long-awaited 2.4 release.

If we want to improve GIMP, we need to stop beating each other over each others heads and instead start to work together, attract more developers and do the changes that we all know are very much needed.

Sven

On Sunday 12 March 2006 09:44, Sven Neumann wrote:

Hi,

"John R. Culleton" writes:

There has been a history of Gimp leadership downplaying the needs of the DTP world. In particular the CMYK color model has been avoided. Now there is (slow) movement in that direction, but CMS profiles are needed as well.

There has been what? I have been pushing the introduction of color management using ICC profiles for quite a while. The need for other color models and high color depths has been acknowledged years ago when we decided that we need to redesign the GIMP core to be able to handle all this. I have been supporting anyone who has expressed his/her interest to work on the GIMP code.

I apparently misinterpeted what I had read earlier. So I look forward to more facilities in support of DTP including CMYK output and CMYK visibility onscreen, even if the actual work is done in RGB.

In this context PostScript and evenually PDF output is part of the puzzle too. I use TeX and pdftex won't take a TIFF file as input. Apparently there are too many variants.

In the meantime I will try to locate the PostScript output code (again) and try to clean it up a bit, as we discussed many moons ago.

Thanks for your continued efforts.

Michael Schumacher wrote:

wayne wrote:

http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/03/07/1813207

Saw the above article on Newsforge.

Well, it shows that the author doesn't read the OpenUsability forum. Of course, this makes it a suitable article for NewsForged, but without proof for the authors claims it is worthless.

I'd highly recommend and appreciate it if anyone who wants to participate in the discussion that will take place in this thread reads the relevant sources (OpenUsability forum, GIMP mailing list archives, news group and Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop) himself and in whole. Thank you.

Michael

Hi Michael,

I have been searching for the bugzilla for occurrences of the word "gimpshop" and cannot find anything except a small refernce to changing the name of the "dialogs" menu (*).

Do you have any bug in mind ? I might have not used the bugzilla search function very efficiently.

Thanks in advance,

Regards,

Olivier.

(*) Well, I found 4 bugs, but in 2, "gimpshop" is just used to say "works for me in gimp and gimpshop" and in the third, "gimpshop" looks like a misspelling of "gimpshot"

On Monday 13 March 2006 10:10, Olivier Ripoll wrote:

Michael Schumacher wrote:

wayne wrote:

http://software.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/03/07/1813207

Saw the above article on Newsforge.

Well, it shows that the author doesn't read the OpenUsability forum. Of course, this makes it a suitable article for NewsForged, but without proof for the authors claims it is worthless.

I'd highly recommend and appreciate it if anyone who wants to participate in the discussion that will take place in this thread reads the relevant sources (OpenUsability forum, GIMP mailing list archives, news group and Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop) himself and in whole. Thank you.

Michael

Hi Michael,

I have been searching for the bugzilla for occurrences of the word "gimpshop" and cannot find anything except a small refernce to changing the name of the "dialogs" menu (*).

Do you have any bug in mind ? I might have not used the bugzilla search function very efficiently.

Thanks in advance,

Regards,

Olivier.

(*) Well, I found 4 bugs, but in 2, "gimpshop" is just used to say "works for me in gimp and gimpshop" and in the third, "gimpshop" looks like a misspelling of "gimpshot"

_______________________________________________ Gimp-user mailing list
Gimp-user@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user

AFAIK Gimpshop or gimp-shop is an offshoot of Gimp that is not well regarded here because of procedural issues. It apparently tries to put the look and feel of Photoship onto Gimp. I would search Google to find out more.

John R. Culleton wrote:

On Monday 13 March 2006 10:10, Olivier Ripoll wrote:

AFAIK Gimpshop or gimp-shop is an offshoot of Gimp that is not well regarded here because of procedural issues. It apparently tries to put the look and feel of Photoship onto Gimp. I would search Google to find out more.

Hi John,

I was referring to the Michael's sentence about "Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop". I am trying to find such threads in Bugzilla, but I can't.

Best regards,

Olivier

Olivier Ripoll wrote:

I was referring to the Michael's sentence about "Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop". I am trying to find such threads in Bugzilla, but I can't.

The one I had in mind was
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=309707. Theres' more on the mailing list and the newsgroup comp.graphics.apps.gimp, the threads in the latter also illustrates some of the more recent and unfortunate effects of this fork (or, to be more precise, the GIMP/GIMPShop hybrid Linspire ships)

HTH,
Michael

Olivier Ripoll wrote:

I was referring to the Michael's sentence about "Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop". I am trying to find such threads in Bugzilla, but I can't.

You haven't tried, have you ? Point your browser to bugzilla.gnome.org and search for gimpshop. Voila: 309707.

Regards, Stephan.

Stephan Hegel wrote:

Olivier Ripoll wrote:

I was referring to the Michael's sentence about "Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop". I am trying to find such threads in Bugzilla, but I can't.

You haven't tried, have you ? Point your browser to bugzilla.gnome.org and search for gimpshop. Voila: 309707.

Regards, Stephan.

Thanks Stephan,

Unfortunately, this bug is the one I mentioned earlier in the thread. I think you probably overlooked this part of the messages:

>I have been searching for the bugzilla for occurrences of the word >"gimpshop" and cannot find anything except a small refernce to changing >the name of the "dialogs" menu"

Best regards,

Olivier

Michael Schumacher wrote:

Olivier Ripoll wrote:

I was referring to the Michael's sentence about "Bugzilla for threads concerning GIMPShop". I am trying to find such threads in Bugzilla, but I can't.

The one I had in mind was
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=309707. Theres' more on the mailing list and the newsgroup comp.graphics.apps.gimp, the threads in the latter also illustrates some of the more recent and unfortunate effects of this fork (or, to be more precise, the GIMP/GIMPShop hybrid Linspire ships)

HTH,
Michael

Thanks Michael,

I'll have a look to the newsgroup. I remember that the issue was also mentioned on the GUG forums, so it might also be a valuable link for background on the topic:
http://gug.sunsite.dk/forum/?threadid=2721 Probably, the gimpshop blog also has some info about it in the comments related to the announcement.

Best regards,

Olivier