Google| Subject | Re: Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP? |
| From | Savageduck |
| Date | 04/06/2014 23:29 (04/06/2014 14:29) |
| Message-ID | <2014040614294325914-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Bob |
| Followups | Bob (1h & 41m) > Savageduck |
On 2014-04-06 20:23:20 +0000, Bob <bob@spam-place.com>said:
BobGood! At least we can agree on that.
In article <2014040520482683697-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:SavageduckBob
[ ... ]. Regardless of the claims of GIMP evangelists/advocates it is not the equal of Photoshop CS6/CC, PSE, or lightroom. [ ... ]
Of course Gimp isn't equal to Photoshop etc. There are lots of things Photoshop does that Gimp doesn't do.
There are however, things Gimp does that Photoshop doesn't.Yup! It irritates the piss out of me, Photoshop doesn't do that. ...unless you were thinking of something specific, nothing else comes readily to mind.
The vast bulk of things a person needs to do though can be done with either....but not all.
[ Oh, and BTW, many, if not most Gimp users have used Photoshop.With the exception of Floyd, who wouldn't deign to lower himself to use Win or OSX.
So you may want to make up another 'fact' to explain why there are many, many happy and success Gimp users. ]Most of that happy group are Linux users, and rabid Win & OSX naysayers with little choice in digital image editing software other than GIMP. The Win & OSX GIMP users who might have at one time or another been exposed to another piece of digital editing software are the usually the frugal bunch who are not prepared to open their wallets to other than open source freeware. The last version of PS they might have used was PS7 because they didn't want to get on the CS upgrade $$$ treadmill. They then rationalized their decision by declaring that GIMP was the solution to their digital editing woes.
As to being happy GIMP users, they sure are a reactionary defensive bunch. ...but who am I to know what works for you.
I came into this thread when you posed the question to nospam: "So then you are saying GIMP *can* be used efficiently with good results?"
You might recall that my response was the following: "Not efficiently, using it is a royal PIA, and other software available for Windows and OSX is superior in all ways. However, some GIMP users who have no desire to use Win or OSX, and only think open source freeware have been able to produce acceptable images.
I have a copy of GIMP 2.8.2 on this Mac which I visit from time to time to remind me just why I don't include it in my image processing workflow. Regardless of the claims of GIMP evangelists/advocates it is not the equal of Photoshop CS6/CC, PSE, or lightroom. There are also some other affordable and very powerful image editing apps available for OSX (I don't check on Win stuff) which put GIMP in the shade.
So while GIMP might suffice for you, Floyd, and other single minded Linux users, it doesn't do it for me, and the great majority individuals in the graphics and digital imaging world. If I didn't use PS/CC and LR5, I would buy the $29.99 Pixelmator to use before I made GIMP part of my daily workflow."
You never responded to that, and might never have seen it, but Floyd did.
If you ever move off the Linux platform I suggest you take some of the other software offerings out for a test drive, you might be surprised how many have evolved over the last 20 years.
-- Regards,
Savageduck
04/05/2014-
