Google| Subject | Re: Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP? |
| From | Alan Browne |
| Date | 04/06/2014 02:05 (04/05/2014 20:05) |
| Message-ID | <gJ-dncGDWrmrB93OnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Bob |
On 2014.04.05, 19:32 , Bob wrote:
BobShort answer: it's the truth and perhaps helpful to the OP (if not in the short term). Don't exclude the rest of the answer I gave him that may also be of use to him.
In article <id-dnQJU_6bV693OnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca>wrote:Alan BrowneBob
[ ... ] All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp.
Why would you write this?
Long answer:
I know an awful lot of photographers.
I know an awful lot of professional graphics artists.
I know an awful lot of computer programmers / computer "geeks".
I'm very experienced with many OS' (that predate Windows and OS X and even Unix by a pretty long period). I'm very proficient in Windows (well, perhaps less so these days) and OS X. I was moderately proficient in Linux (of course I'm talking about maintaining systems, command line use, etc.)
On a Venn diagram, there some is overlap between these worlds. And in the world of photography the overwhelming choices of OS's are Windows and OS X.
In the professional photography domain it's roughly an even split between Windows and OS X.
In the professional graphics domain it's heavily weighted to OS X. About 80 - 90%.
And absolutely NOWHERE (in my experience) are there professional (or even advanced "amateurs") in photography that use Linux or The Gimp.
It's just not a common, useful platform because it is not supported by the professional apps makers. Professionals in these domains don't geek out over freeware and the "free software" movement; they get and pay for the best applications available - and the best "plugins" and add ons and extensions (what have you) for those applications. Don't forget that these people have to communicate (photogs, editors, designers, writers, printers ... the whole lot) ... the common exchanges are those files created by the apps used by these companies and agencies. Linux may be in their servers, but not on their desktops.
That is not to say that Linux/Gimp and other applications in the domain cannot be used (or are not used), they are just rare in the professional domains of photography and graphics.
So Linux/The Gimp is just not a good place to be if one is serious about photography over being a computer geek/programmer.
As to Linux, its desktop environments (yes there are several) are mediocre as desktop systems compared to OS X. They're probably mediocre compared to Windows 7 (with which I have little experience but I beleive to be one of the few that MS "got right").
I had hope of Linux being the Great One - and in those days I spit when anyone mentioned Apple and MacIntosh and OS X.
But, when a) I found Linux to be all but useless as an "office" and photography platform and b) MS released Vista and c) I needed a new computer ... I abandoned all hope and bought an iMac.
My Motto has been, since then in early 2008: "OS X: What Linux wants to be when it grows up."
[1]: Linux' strengths are in servers, database systems, embedded systems, super-computing and other specific, somewhat narrowly scoped areas.
Not desktop.
Sorry for the long reply, I didn't have time to compose a short one.
-- Those who have reduced our privacy, whether they are state or commercial actors, prefer that we do not reduce theirs. - Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.
04/05/2014-
