Re: [Gimp-developer] Asking for a Miracle !?

I find one effective way to combat "missing feature" aggravation is to ask
the person (or one's self) to put a price tag on that feature. The answer
is generally far far less than the retail price of Photoshop, even when you
add then all up. That reality check is a good way for people to start
thinking about software as an investment. With Photoshop is an investment
in time and money. Time to learn, and the retail price. With GIMP, you are
just investing time. There are people with good justification for using
Photoshop, but the vast majority of people, including professionals, will
do just fine with GIMP. Another question is how much do you value the
freedom that comes also at no cost with GIMP. Such things have no dollar
value, but are a source of great excitement for me personally. When I teach
people graphic design, I don't have to require them to buy expensive
commercial packages, or encourage grand-theft software, as a required first
step. When I contribute graphics or web code to Open Source projects, I
feel a connection to something greater than myself, and a kinship with all
those who helped me to learn and develop as an artist, a programmer, etc.
GIMP thus provides an additional important thing: the ability to give back.
This is also priceless, imho.
On 31 Jul 2015 5:34 am, "Gez" <listas ohweb com ar> wrote:

El jue, 30-07-2015 a las 11:52 +0100, C R escribió:

It seems to me, the real problem is not that it doesn't have the same
UI as
Photoshop, but rather that people forget how long it took them to
Photoshop in the first place.
I've found that showing people the power of the software, more often
not, rekindles that essential flame of curiosity, which is essential
learning anything new. The rest is patience, and realising that the
investment pays off tremendously in the end. Even if you can not
Photoshop entirely in your working environment, you have one more
standards-compliant tool to produce graphics, and this tool is usable
everyone in the world at no charge. That's an enormous advantage over
Photoshop, and well worth the time it takes to learn the software.

I concur.
I have similar stories about people complaining about how bad,
incomplete, uncapable and clunky GIMP is, until they actually see it
working for real.
Most of the complaints come from a brief look at the UI and trying to
do something the same way they'd do with the other application. When
they fail then the tool sucks.
When you switch to a new tool you have to spend some time with it
learning how to use it. It's curious that so many people who moved from
Corel Draw to Illustrator forced themselves to learn the new tool
despite its differences with the latter, but they tear their clothes
when somebody suggests that they have to learn something when they move
from PS to GIMP.
I think it's a "status" thing. Moving from one software to another
which is some sort of industry de-facto standard, costs money, regarded
as better, etc. that's perceived as an improvement, so the effort
needed to learn the new thing seems justified.
However, moving from THE de-facto industry standad to a free
application made by a group of volunteers is perceived as a downgrade,
so people puts the burden on the application.

It's not fair at all, but it is what it is. The only way to fight that
is with education, showing people what can be done with the tool.
Results matter and the process matters too.
Your gif is a nice example because it show that complex things can be

Maybe it would be a good idea to post some breakdowns and timelapses of
complex work done in GIMP as an example of what can be done with the
tool. Not tutorials, real world examples of good work made with GIMP,
so new users get to know what results to expect once they master the

gimp-developer-list mailing list
List address:    gimp-developer-list gnome org
List membership:
List archives:

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