My experiences with other peoples' work proves that The Gimp is capable and powerful. That being said, I feel that any GUI application with a well-designed interface should be fairly intuitive and I should be able to get up to speed in a few minutes (I learn quickly). Again, the GIMP does deserve criticism in some respects, but 3/4 of the problems that the reviewer sited were not the fault of GIMP or its design. The UI seems practical to some of us even novice users that I know. It is similar to Photoshop in the sense that it performs most of the same functions, but it is not a clone by design.
I personally feel that this person is just looking for a Photoshop clone, which GIMP is not. The "reviewer" hasn't familiarized himself with how the drawing tools work to get them to function properly. I'm not sure what was up with his copy, but JPEG images (over 30 MB) open up within a fraction of a second for me. first row has selection tools, and fourth row has drawing tools. They are legitimate points, but the majority of the problems are simply related to the Mac install. Really, I don't disagree with the reviewer. There is no sub-pixel hinting going on in his makeshift X-server, and it looks like it is using an inferior render.
/Gimp-fullss-58b9a4b95f9b58af5c82d5ba-5c8bcb0946e0fb000146acee.jpg "gimp for mac os review")
I agree that GIMP does need some help in many areas, but the program isn't ideal for Macs right now, without some work.Ī) It requires an X11 server on top of the MacOS.ī) The filesystem issue is related to the fact that GIMP wasn't designed for OSX, even if it can be compiled for it.Ĭ) The font issues are related to the fact that it is using a different font renderer than OSX. Many of problems that the author sites in the review are problems that are native to the Mac version. I'm not very familiar with anything but Photoshop basics, but I'm quite familiar with GIMP. A GIMP user with a lot of experience with the program, may have the same problems when migrating to Photoshop. I think that it just depends on what you are used to using.
#Gimp for mac os review pro
Besides, both Paint Shop Pro and Photoshop Elements cost bellow $100 (with PS Elements getting bundled with most scanners/printers/digital cameras, albeit without the much needed 16bit support either)."
#Gimp for mac os review drivers
Personally, before I get persuaded to use Gimp again for my photography projects, I would need -in addition to the author's peeves - full 16-bit per channel support, high-quality scanning/printing drivers with integrated GUI (a'la SilverFast), and a 'crop and rotate' feature (as seen in PS/PSE). I think that's one of the best-written articles I've ever read about the reality of most open-source geek-driven projects vs their equivelant professional/proprietary ones.
That designer even bought a 'supported' version of MacGimp by an OSS-Mac company, Archei, but he never heard back for his support requests (free Gimp for Macs here).
#Gimp for mac os review professional
Eugenia writes "Many in the F/OSS community are raving about the Gimp, however pros who have actually used Photoshop think differently: This Mac professional designer goes through the steps of getting Gimp 2.0 up and running on his Mac, only to get baffled by the chaotic interface in general and its non-standard UI compared to other Mac apps, its slowness to open large files and to apply filters, the unintuitive tools that accompany it and its very visible bad quality of text and lines/shapes.
0 kommentar(er)
