Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1

On Sat, 28 Dec 2024 11:04:22 -0600, chrisv wrote:

 

GIMP is basically as good as PhotoShop.

 
Again, I wouldn't know.  I've assumed that PS is better, based upon
its popularity and price.  I would expect evolving technology would
favor the payware, when it comes to outright performance.
>

The primary expenditure of commercial software is to develop
a GUI that can accommodate the stupid -- and I mean STUPID.

I have done paid, work for various "professional" studios and
those people are STUPID.  STUPID!  They are have little knowledge
of image processing and they don't need it because their equally
STUPID customers won't notice.  What we have is a pathetic case
of stupidity nullifying other stupidity -- and the same applies
to other ares of software.

Both the GIMP and Photoshop (and all other such software) are
merely GUI wrappers around standard image processing techniques.
How the fuck can they be different?  They can't.

Except perhaps in the GUI.  Photoshop, as all commercial software,
caters to the stupid.  The GIMP not so much.

But, ever since the "Goat Invasion," i.e. the incorporation by the
GIMP of the GEGL and BABL libraries, the GIMP now offers high
bit image capabilities, up to 64-bit floating point, that
Photoshop cannot match (at least since the last time I used that
junk Photoshop).

The conclusion is that anyone who elevates Photoshop above the
GIMP is an ignoramus idiot.  Only the GUIs differ and in the
ultimate sense the GUI is totally irrelevant.


--
Gentoo: The Fastest GNU/Linux Hands Down