This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!


Posted by: Anonymous [ip:] on November 15, 2007 07:09 AM
Gimp's certainly not garbage, I use it loads, have done since its early days, mostly under Linux. Raw files can be handled via dcraw externally and/or the plugin mechanisms. The UI, I've got used to it, I find photoshop no more or less unintuitive, I got used to that, too. On OSX, I use "gimpshop", a fork of gimp with a "more photoshop-like UI", not because of the UI but because I found a packaged version which installed with no fuss and I was in a hurry. It's far less of a lumbering beast than photoshop when just whipping together web images etc. The absence of photoshop's complicated and optimistic colour management is, for these kind of uses, a positive advantage, too - things acually come out the colour you expect. HOWEVER, there's one major, unforgivable flaw with gimp, and I've somewhere gained the impression that this is an ideological invariant for the main development branch, and that's the absence of anything better than 8bit/chan colour. For film or print work, I have to use cinepaint, or resort to photoshop, gimp is simply not designed to be up to the job. Thankfully, with OSS, however "closed" the main dev coterie might or might not come across, *anyone* is free to do what the cinepaint people have done, fork and take things in a direction more useful to themselves, as often and as radically as they like. For all it's phenomenal power, slickness and expense, we can't do that with photoshop. So while, as a developer who'se been around for far too long, I do find the little cliques and personality cults which emerge a bit annoying, you always get that, and folks get things done. At the end of the day if you can do something better then just do it, and you'll make *someone* happy, at least.

I think the icons rant here has probably more merit than the GIMP one, given human nature and so on - the license seems clear enough. As someone else said, worldwide cultural differences and all manner of things should make it pretty obvious that if you want to incorporate some kind of courtesy grace period into a public domain license, then you should actually incorporate it, not assume people will guess it.


Return to When open source projects close the process, something's wrong