it won't load anymore; when i click on the photoshop dock icon it crashes my computer.
so now i got rid of my mac, since without photoshop, it's useless. how much does ubuntu cost?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-15 23:48
It costs your time. Use Gentoo instead. That way your computer will be fast.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 0:00
Use the GIMP. It's a free (as in freedom) photoshop replacement, you can run in on OS X. It's easy to learn, there are 10 times more filters than in Photoshop, and it's scriptable using script-fu.
Stop furthering adobe's monopolistic "industry standard". The GIMP can open PSD files, and people locked in the past will be able to open the files you will create with the GIMP.
GIMP is shit. The interface is retarded and it's slow and dumb in general with less useful features and worse implementations. There's a reason Photoshop is the standard and GIMP is still only used by pimply Linux nerds coding header graphics for their nerd blogs. Additionally, the Mac port of it sucks, it's still in X11 if I recall correctly.
Though >>1 is a troll, the way to fix your problem would be to trash all the Adobe files in applications along with the preferences and application support files it created, and reinstall from your original disc. Or examine the panic.log to see what exactly is "crashing your computer" on launch.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 10:59
You get used to the GIMP's interface. The tear-off menus are actually pretty nice.
The only thing that keeps bothering me is the file open dialog. Inkscape has it too. Whoever made it needs a kick in the balls, and whoever decided not to simply use the same dialog all other Windows programs use needs two.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 13:26
The interface is retarded
Because you can't be bothered to learn
less useful features
what. Yes, adobe always adds retarded misfeatures and support for obscure crap nobody uses (and unfortunately gimp guys follow the trend somewhat), but in terms of real-world features, the GIMP humiliates Photoshop.
There's a reason Photoshop is the standard
Yes, marketing. That's why all those "creative type" fags buy macs, too.
the Mac port of it sucks, it's still in X11 if I recall correctly
OH NOES MY MENU BAR IS DISPLAYING X11 INSTEAD OF GIMP SO I CANT USE THAT SOFTWARE!!!!
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 15:41
>>7
that's the gnome file chooser dialog. it kind of fails, but not as much as the stripped-down version of it used by some applications in gnome (i'm looking at you, firefox).
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 19:02
>>7 >>9
whine more. This does the job perfectly. It just lacks all the bling bling Windows tacks on to their default dialogs.
GNOME understands that usability is about creating software that is easy for everyone to use, not about piling on features. GNOME's community of professional and volunteer usability experts have created Free Software's first and only Human Interface Guidelines, and all core GNOME software is adopting these principles.
>>10
The problem is that instead of typing the path, arrowing down through auto complete and then just pressing enter, you have to first spend 30 minutes on google to figure out that you have to press ctrl+L to get a path entry box, then you can type, but the auto complete is all fucked up and you have to press arrows and tab and it becomes all slow and unresponsive and then finally you have to full path then you have to press enter and sometimes enter another time(?), THEN even if you've selected a file it only closes the path box and you have to fucking press enter AGAIN to finally open the goddamned file. FUCK
>>7
It's possible to get used to a weird interface, but it's not possible to get used to a shitty, useless interface. Toolboxes can't possibly be made thin or short to fit a reasonable portion of your screen, and the picture will constantly overlap your tools and there's no way to help it, as you lose anything when you need to zoom in. You waste more time trying to find some piece of shit free window hidden behind another piece of shit free window than doing actual work, and the image tools themselves work in a shitty way and lack information and feedback. It even took me 30 seconds to find what's an open image's pixel size for fuck's sake.
As for the common dialogs, the GNOME hippy who did them needs to be punched and deprived of his daily LSD for this.
>>10
Human Interface Guidelines my ass, that file selector is a bad joke.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 22:42
Hey, >>8, something to keep in mind in the future:
It is often best to be silent and thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt.
It's obvious to anyone with a clue that you don't know what you're talking about. Having fun fapping to your religion?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-16 23:54
>>10
I like most of Gnome, but the file selector sucks. It does get the job done in most cases, but every once in awhile you have to jump through hoops, which is hardly human.
>>12
GIMP is a serious image editor. It may lack some of the features of Photoshop, but these are of little use to most people, such as non-RGB colorspaces. 16-bit is enough for anything that was or ever will be a jpeg. These features are in the works, though. The toolboxes can be resized, with limitations. The interface is more customizable than you might think, and the current unstable branch does a lot to improve its intuitiveness. But if it took you 30 seconds to find information that is plainly visible in the window's title bar, it isn't the software's fault.
If you need "professional" software, by all means use Photoshop. But for the average home user who plays with pixels for fun, GIMP is everything they need and more.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 0:04
>>8
Lawl, I'll leave you with that. I can at least say, though, that graphics editors are something you become habituated to and are hard to break habits from, and GIMP is so awkwardly different to anything else that it provides a bit of a significant barrier to adoption. The only reasonable way I see GIMP being a good alternative for someone sick of Photoshop i with that GIMPShop thing, but I've never actually used it and don't know how accurate it is.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 0:22
internet explorer is better than firefox.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 3:56
About the Gimp vs. Photoshop thing: features are really irrelevant.
Starting with Photoshop 5.0 (the one that added editable text) it was already close to perfect.
I've used Photoshop for 10 years to do many, many things: photo processing, illustration colorization, pixel art, web design, scripted image generation, /b/, and general design wankery (lol wallpapers). When using photoshop, I am a fucking machine.
Fuck filters, I only really need Gaussian blur. What I really need is something predictable: for example I can tell exactly what every button and slider in the Image > Adjustments menu will do to any given image.
If I were to use the GIMP, I'd have to re-learn all that: most of the important tools behave very differently. You tweak the colors differently. There are radical and subtle differences in the tool behavior. How the mouse buttons are used, how shift, alt/option and ctrl/cmd modify things, space dragging behavior..... all that is different.
Because you almost never see any decent artist using the GIMP for creation (Inkscape guys processing their images with the GIMP don't count), that must mean that this software has absolutely no artistic or technical advantage. The only reasons to use it are GNU freedom hippie commie bullshit, or price, and investing many hours relearning things from photoshop wastes time you could use making money. It's just a nerd toy, and most of them are really tasteless, as evidenced by the ugliness of your average GNAA/Lunix desktop.
>>17
Use optimized CFLAGS and re-emerge ethe GIMP. You''ll get a big productivity boost. (´∀` )
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 14:55
>>17
No one is claiming that GIMP is better than Photoshop. No one is telling you to switch. If you have used Photoshop for ten years, by all means stick with it. But shitting on about how Photoshop is perfect and GIMP is useless is fucking stupid. It's kind of like someone who's driven a Ford for ten years screaming at every Dodge driver, "HOW DARE YOU THINK THAT YOUR CAR CAN GO ON REAL ROADS!!!11" Fucking stupid. Whine all you want about unfamiliar menu structure, but GIMP isn't really that hard to use. Were you a Photoshop expert the minute you first installed it ten years ago? I doubt it. The real main barrier to GIMP adoption is the fact that most people have never heard of it, which has much to do with the ease with which Photoshop can be pirated.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 16:18
>>21
I agree with this man wholeheartedly, although I must admit, everyone I've ever met that uses the Gimp is an "anti-Adobe, anti-Corporate, fight the fukken power man"-type fag. Coincidence?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 16:58
>>21
Have you read that post? Reducing the differences to a simple menu structure and tool layout issue is wrong. The GIMP is a suitable MSPAINT replacement. It's not even close to matching the quality of Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop elements.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 17:31
>>23
i've heard much about the things photoshop has that gimp doesn't, but i've never heard about the differences with paint shop pro. please enlighten me.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 19:53
>>21
The real main barrier to GIMP adoption is that the interface is ass and its not very user friendly. Now I hate photoshop too so fuck them both.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 20:10
>>24
PSP Interface is not as big a fucking pain as the GIMP.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-17 20:38
i've never heard about the differences with paint shop pro
The interface doesn't suck hairy nards.
Hey, I just remembered. Has anyone used Paint.net? I think the site is just www.paint.net. It needs you to download the 5gb .Net CLR thing to work, but apart from that it seems really lightweight and well thought out for a semi-simple graphics app. It's kind of like the GIMP in terms of featureset but doesn't require ten unix commmands to crop an image.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-18 0:18
>>28
How to describe a GUI: uh, click here, then here, and...
I have a better idea: find out for yourself. You won't believe anything anyway until you do.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-18 20:35
>>30
my friend keeps calling user interfaces 'layouts'. "hey dude whats linux's layout like??"
>>24
- A waaaay better interface, the best interface IMO, with dockable toolbars which can be made as thin as necessary, plus rollable toolbars and toolbars which you can turn on or off with F2 (a toolbar set) or individually (with other hot keys, all customizable). Can be properly configured to be absolutely minimalist and absolutely productive.
- As >>32 said, native vector support: You can create vector layers, which contain one or more vectors (or recursive groups of vectors), which can be basic vectors like text, rectangles, ellipses or geometric shapes (with nice polygon/star/spike/etc. generator), as well as outlines (with bezier, point editing, cutting, merging, customizable arrowheads, etc.). Vectors are made of one of/both of: a contents material (which can be a colour, gradient (including alpha channel) or pattern (PSP has a library of color, gradient and pattern swatches, and a global material library), and a border material (same as content) plus border width. Vector layers also include alpha properties, and naturally, they can be used in combination with raster and adjustment layers and layer groups. You get a nice, structured tree of all layer groups, layers, masks, groups inside vector layers, and vectors inside groups. There's also a shape library for readily insertable preset shapes classfied by directory.
- Art media layers with real-life-like tools that get wet or dry and stuff, I don't use it, but real-life artists may like it.
- Nice brush system where you have brushes out of basic shapes which you vary in size, aspect, hardness, density, and more, and custom shapes (alpha images) which can be scaled and modified in a similar way; then you have application properties to decide how the brush is to be used (e.g. varying size with direction, oscillating size with stroke, jitter, etc.); finally you can save brush libraries.
- Very fast, high quality (bilinear) zoom for editing (can be turned off if you don't like) and well thought window resizing policies, as well as keys for movement. Well thought keys for dealing with selections, layers (oh, and there's no retarded thing such as layer size, but you have optional transparency/layer lock), copying and pasting vectors on vectors, vectors on raster, merged images on raster, etc.
- Also includes other advanced features such as Python scripting (can visually record macros, then hand tune them if you need, or just write them from scratch), history viewing, editing and saving (can change something many steps behind in history then replay everything else you did), 16 bit per component, and a good library of image filters and deformators, as well as the classic custom image filters, image arithmetics, colour balancers and options, and Photoshop filter plugins.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-19 16:51
I had to install Gimpshop on somebody's mac today because I didn't want to find him a warezed photoshop just to do some simple editing.
Oh god does it still suck at least as much as last time I tried it seriously, circa 2000.
And BTW that hueg dmg download is a rapidshare. What the shit? If you're not gonna pay for your bandwidth at least get a sourceforge account or something. With ~3000+ downloads with a 2 min. waiting time those fags have wasted the equivalent of 4 days of the time of their potential users. Not counting the five minutes the first start-up takes, and the fact that you have to install the Photoshop key bingings yourself.
I should have hit the pirate bay to fetch a photoshop, it would have been much less painful.
>>34
Gimpshop is the GIMP raped by Photoshop-loving faggots. Of course it sucks.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-19 17:49
LAWL A GNU FAG WHO DON'T LIKE PHOTOSHOP INSULTING GNU FAGS WHO LIKE PHOTOSHOP. AS ENTERTAINING AS A LIFESTYLE FURSUITER INSULTING ANOTHER FURRY WHO ONLY FURSUIT FOR YIFFING.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-19 19:54
>>35
As opposed to a non-raped GIMP, which sucks even more.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-20 17:34
The GIMP just plain sucks.
Anyone here who thinks the GIMP is usable has obviously never tried to use it. I did, or at least I tried to. The interface was so shitty that I couldn't do anything with it. After three hours of my time were GONE, I still hadn't even figured out how to install the damn thing. The installer just didn't work. In fact, the installer wasn't even there. I looked through every last folder on my PC, even the hidden ones, but it was nowhere to be found. Talk all you want about upcoming interface and feature improvements, but as long as someone as computer savy as myself can't even locate the installer for it, the GIMP will never be worthwhile.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-20 18:01
>>38
why the hell would you want to use gimp on a non-linux computer?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 1:37
>>38
is not computer saavy then. I consider my dad to have the net surfer computer literacy level and he managed to find out about gimp, download it AND install it (on an xp machine) without having to consult me. I didn't know he had gimp running until he told me he found and installed it.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 3:34
Nobody's gonna comment on >>33? I worked hard to write that in just a break :( .
>>38 was making sense until he mentioned he couldn't install it. I though these comments were related to the actual interface.
To think GIMP was the application they developed GTK for, and its interface fails miserably, while GTK, questionable or not, was a success and many quality GTK applications exist today for both Linux and Windows.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 13:47
I use the Gimp for some things because it does some things better than Photoshop
I also have CS2 installed.
All you fags can eat a dick all day
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 21:01
I use the Gimp for some things because it does some things better than Photoshop
lolwhat
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-21 23:04
>>43
there is no plugin for photoshop that works as well as greycstoration.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 11:26
Use a standalone version. It will spare you the pain of the GIMP.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 14:34
The GIMP UI is goddamn terrible. Apparently, all those years of user complaints doesn't faze the programmers.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 15:53
What, you want them to just do another photoshop clone, duplicating all its flaws for the sake of it?
They are trying to do it right, and ignoring whiners like you is the first step. RTFM before you complain. People don't even bother to learn about the gimp then they go crying "hay change this like it's set up in photoshop" like using a MDI interface just because photoshop does it to emulate the mac os feel.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-22 19:21
They are trying to do it right, and ignoring whiners like you is the first step.
Just because you try doesn't mean you'll succeed.
and ignoring whiners like you is the first step.
Because ignoring potential customers is a brilliant way to make software they'll want to use! Are you in politics?
like using a MDI interface
Even using a virtual desktop with appropriate mouseover selection (lol is dat sum MDI emulation?), GIMP is a complete fail. It's been that way since I first used it (1998), and doesn't look like it'll be changing any time soon.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-23 18:55
I'm not a programmer, but why isn't GIMP skinnable? Someone artistic can rid the rest of us of the eyesore...
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-23 22:11
>>47 They are trying to do it right, and ignoring whiners like you is the first step. >>48, also well, if they are trying to do it right, they have failed. Non-dockable toolbars are clearly inferior and have numerous terrible usability issues.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-23 22:43
this is why i love /comp/.
my psuedo-troll threads like this, browser wars, etc get like 50 posts within a week [not to mention actual discussions].
if gimp could handle vectors anywhere near as well as adobe products, it -might- be worthwhile.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 16:24
Ask anybody with eyeballs.
I want more specific reason. if you are hinting that the gimp is ugly looking, please enlighten me how ugliness is a usability issue.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 16:29
>>55
"i have to change my brush entirely just to resize it? wtf?!"
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 18:06
The ugliness is irrelevant. Adding shiny stuff won't fix the serious usability issues, and because fixing them would mean getting rid of most of the GIMP's legacy, it won't ever happen.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-24 20:28
"i have to change my brush entirely just to resize it? wtf?!"
that parallels with what happens in real life ('A`) however, there is little reason why different brush shapes cannot have any independant resizing mechanism.
>57
give me examples of negative usability issues relating to the gimp.
I did. All the usability issues that I've read are - the file chooser sucks, different brushes for different sizes, and it works differently to photoshop therefore I lose productivity because i'm habituated to photoshop.
I read that it has negative usability issues. The three I listed in this post is a good start. I want more examples.
>>60
That you can't get anything done without excruciating pain with the GIMP is a serious usability issue. I'd get out of computer graphics if I were stuck with this piece of shit.
fuck filters. 95% of those filters aren't nearly as useful as any half-intelligent graphical designer armed with an excellent bezier pen tool interface.
Why would you use a bitmap editor if you want to make vector graphics?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-26 21:07
>>65
Because vectors are a clean way to make lines in raster art?
Like, you know, most the shit that gets posted on 4chan?
Name:
OP here2006-09-26 21:58
this thread is made of fail.
i demand you adobefags gtfo at once.
now lets get back to my problem.
i installed ubuntu on a spare pc my friend gave to me. installation went well, but i'm having trouble adjusting my screen res, and then photoshop won't seem to work on ubuntu.
what should i do /comp/?
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 4:37
>>65
Because sometimes you need to design an outline, then size, place and tune it before converting to raster, or combine vector and bitmap graphics; but you haven't done any real work so you never had the need and don't understand it.
>>67 i demand you adobefags gtfo at once.
I've never used Adobe Photoshop, and I don't like Adobe. You don't need to use Photoshop to realize GIMP's interface is terrible.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 8:57
>>67
this was my original reaction. The interface is not that bad, and it actually fits rather well to a system configured (properly) with a window manager that treats menus in the same fashion (fluxbox, enlightenment, etc.).
It also doesn't look like ass with a decent resolution screen and a GTK theme that doesn't suck nuts. However, considering most people in /comp/ are here for tech support with their AIDS-ridden Dells and asking if we think this Alienware computer is worth $2700 I doubt more than 10% of you have ever seen a linux desktop that isn't put together like a retarded Frankenstein monster
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 9:05
>>69
Bullshit. Do you do any serious stuff with it? No? Then what makes you think your opinion is more qualified than mine? And yes, I'm using a decent window manager, decent GTK theme, and window snapping. This doesn't fix the issues you genius. Read my GIMPlog, as well as what I said in the /prog thread.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 9:40
It also doesn't look like ass with a decent resolution screen
Translation: I don't edit anything larger than my monitor, and I don't zoom much either.
A lot of editing occurs with images that are way larger than any monitor currently out there, particularly on images that will be printed. I am no pro, yet even I routinely work on images that are 3k*3k and up.
Gimp's layout when the canvas is taking up the entire screen is a pretty bad, no matter what you do. :(
>>70 I don't give a shit what you said in your post, this thread is tl;dr and it doesn't change the fact that you're a faggot and GIMP is not as shitty a program as you say it is
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 13:08
>>72
So you never do anything serious with GIMP. Of course, to edit your typical small pictures without zooming in much, and an occassional wallpaper minor fix, it's sort of alright (the interface still sucks, but at least you don't get it fully messed), but as soon as you need to do anything more than you'd do on MSPaint, you'll realize how much it sucks.
The graphics engine and filters may be good (even if they lack some features such as vectors), but the interface is terrible. I can't think of a worse interface for GIMP.
>>72
Get two monitors because the program can't handle big images? Wow, you're a big loser.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-27 19:12
You need at least one monitor to display the GIMP interface. The GIMP assumes that you use a WM that isn't completely retarded, and every WM supports two monitors nicely.
I too can excuse my shitty behavior by blaming it on the environment, but that doesn't make it so.
Besides, GIMP isn't making any 'assumptions'. It's had that idiotic style of interface for the past decade. Do you remember what linux and hardware was like in the 90s?
I've used both GIMP and Photoshop since 1998. But hey, I guess that counts less than a penguin fucker who has only used one, am I right or amirite?
It's not just Photoshop. Every other raster image editor has a less shitty UI. Even MS Paint has a better UI, despite being useless. About the only thing I dislike more than Gimp is ShiPainter.
Name:
moot!Ep8pui8Vw22006-09-28 6:25
>>82
Yeah, I'm sorry, but we don't allow use of the word "straw man". It makes you sound pretentious, and that is unbecoming a stalwart 4channer. B&.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-28 8:29
Can I suck your dick, moot? You turn me on.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-28 8:54
gimp is a slang term for a person who cant walk. and photoshop is a slang term for best photo editor.
Name:
Anonymous2006-09-28 10:48
>just because it's not the same interface as photoshop makes it idiotic? i think not.
No. Just because it's a piece of shit, inherently flawed interface which needs a second monitor to work decently (and incidentally, it looks ugly), makes it idiotic. Photoshop has nothing to do with this; GIMP's interface would suck even if Photoshop or any other painter didn't exist.
Name:
Steve Jobs2006-09-28 13:19
Please note that Photoshop too can benefit from being displayed on two monitors.
Incidentally, we offer nice 30" cinema displays. Please check them out.