the "professional" package?.... which version?...capanno wrote:Photoshop costs about R5500 - R6000.
Graphic Design (Gimp)
So what exactly was the bloatware comment aimed at then?rustypup wrote:correct. who was comparing it? who even mentioned photoshop?
The filters are mostly crap but some of them are essential, such as blurring, unsharp masking, and a handful of the others. I actually think that Photoshop, by and large, isn't overflowing with useless features. A few, yes, but not many.as to "bloatware", how many of those thousands of features included in photoshop do you use on a daily basis? how many of the myriad pre-installed filters do you use continuously? hmm?
Photoshop costs around R6000.that being said, however, once you get to grips with the interface, the workflow aspect can be overlooked when we take a peek at the price department... photoshop R19k-R20k vs Gimp R0k...
along with support for all those not-so-common image formats is the wonderful, opensource, scripting engine, which opens up a whole new aspect of image processing. yes, it's the ugly cousin... but it's nowhere near as shabby as the photoshop fundies wish it were
What image formats? Like dds? Hardly useful. And Photoshop can handle image formats like .exr, which I doubt Gimp can. Exr is very useful format for graphics professionals. And I don't "wish" that Gimp was crap, if that's what you're implying. I've used it, and I think it leaves a hell of a lot to be desired, that's all.
human slave in an insect nation
-
rustypup
- Registered User
- Posts: 8872
- Joined: 13 Dec 2004, 02:00
- Location: nullus pixius demonica
- Contact:
don't blame me if your mind subconsciously equates photoshop with bloatware...Leigh wrote:So what exactly was the bloatware comment aimed at then?
.... why could i not be referring here to corell?... Leigh wrote:graphics professionals.
i think i spot the source of the confusion here...Leigh wrote:I've used it, and I think it leaves a hell of a lot to be desired
this thread is not about a professional package replacement... it's about the gimp... a freeware application which makes available, at no charge, a large number of tools previously the exclusive domain of power users, and eye-patch_and_parrot characters....
the holiday-snap market is more than adequately served, methinks... maybe not a porsche, but a reliable, and innovative, skedonk nonetheless
Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so - Bertrand Russel
Because Photo-paint is a rather lousy piece of software and GIMP has never tried to emulate it. And Painter is something entirely different. GIMP is, whether you like it or not, an attempt at an open source version of Photoshop. Naturally this means that Photoshop is the first application to compare it torustypup wrote:don't blame me if your mind subconsciously equates photoshop with bloatware...Leigh wrote:So what exactly was the bloatware comment aimed at then?
As above, hehethis thread is not about a professional package replacement...
At any rate, my intention wasn't to sidetrack this thread for this long. I just initially wanted to comment on the bloatware remark
human slave in an insect nation
