Re: [Gimp-developer] suggestion for new versions of GIMP


I use both gimp and photoshop and find it questionable that anyone laugh
at GIMP.
If they do so you have to question why?  I feel they have little
knowlege of image manipulation programs if they belittle GIMP and don't
recogise its' greatest strengths.

…or they miss some vital functionalities like I do. Higher bit depths or built-in raw handling are not really the case for me here. What is? Proper CMYK, Lab and multichannel support. These can be provided by recent architectural changes, but I adhere to the current status quo. Without it, it's hard to think seriously about GIMP in publishing industry.

-simple layout of menus

IMHO it's quite relative thing. Besides, to be effective in everyday work, you have to use keyboard shortcuts extensively and cut navigating the menus to the minimum. Also, menu layout convenient in one specific use can be painful to work with in another.

-the best selection tools I've used (I feel like I'm suffering when I
have to use photoshop)

It depends what rows your boat. I personally use quick mask/masks almost exclusively, caring a little about "automatic" selection (in my experience such tools work best when used in functionality showcase movies ;>), so choice GIMP-way/Photoshop-way doesn't really make a difference.

- covers the most important photoshop use cases (bar high end
photography needs)

It's hard to say which use cases are most important. It strongly depends on the area of application.

-much more that I take for granted

I know so much more is coming in the next release that is amazing, more
visibly planned.  Soon enough they are targetting high bit depth image
processing which many use as reason to only give a cursory glance at
GIMPs strengths.

More than this, there is no illusion amongst the developers of GIMP
where its strength and weaknesses lie.

I could easily write a blog post stating why I feel GIMP is in position
to be a better program than photoshop for most people in ten years time.
Summarised it would be:  It's focus is smaller and targetted to what

This "narrow focus" is a double edged blade. And, as for what "counts" it's highly subjective matter.

as such the number of developer hours required is reduced sub
stantially and the quality increases dramatically.

<cut />


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]