nospam
In article <2i74i95akjcnjkpjdq3p15sa9adjpqtn8g@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:

Tony Cooper
The learning curve for Gimp is no different than the learning curve for CS, Elements, or Lightroom for basic editing. It is a bit more difficult to learn only because there are fewer tutorials, and some of the tutorials are not as well done as the ones for the Adobe products.

nospam
it's more difficult because it was designed by geeks who don't know much about ui/ux design. photoshop was desgined by photographers and graphic artists *for* photographers and graphic artists, and it's been refined over the years.

Tony Cooper
The "learning curve" is about how long it takes a person to become proficient, and "proficient" is based on the person's needs. The people who use Gimp don't - as a rule - have high-end needs.

nospam
that's a flawed comparison, as usual.

for a valid comparison, you need to use the same tasks for both apps.

someone with lesser needs won't need to learn as much, so obviously it will take less time for those with lesser needs, unless the app is totally braindead (which does happen).

Tony Cooper
Starting at Day One, two people of equal ability to work with a new program will be proficient enough in the same number of days in either program.

nospam
wrong.

Tony Cooper
Adobe's programs are fantastic; I'm now at CC CS6, have and use LR, own (but don't use very much) Elements 9, and will have Premiere as soon as it arrives. But, there's no need to badmouth Gimp when it does the job for those who use it.

nospam
i'm not badmouthing anything.