sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

how would you like it if someone took one of YOUR photos changed it just enough then posted it without giving you credit. you would be hacked off. That is what the theifs at gimp did. stole the hard work of others. Guess I am a hot head cause i hate theives. In addition the level of support for ps and pse DWARFS everybody else combined. finally what really pisses me off is that gimp is based on the philosophy "you can get something for nothing" kinda like casino gambelling. Which in reality isn't true. What it boils down to is how much are you willing to sell out your integrity for?

RocketScientist Loc: Littleton, Colorado

Please reference any actual facts that this statement is based on.

RobertMaxey

Wow, how seriously flawed. You do not know PS history, Gimp history, or much about software development, I can only assume. You are so far off the plate.

RobertMaxey

Gimp is well supported. Has been for a very long time. Does just about as much as Photoshop does. Plenty of plug-ins as well. It might lack some of Photoshop's features, but so what? Most PS users only likely use half of the programs capabilities anyway. In my view, so many people use PS because they read how good it is without knowing if it is indeed better than a program like Gimp.

Stop calling Spencer a crook and learn a little this and that. It was originally released to the UNIX community, so there is more to it than simply making a copy as you suggest. A hell of a lot of very smart coders further the development of Gimp; it is not just hackers as you foolishly claim.

The program was released as open source software, so we can read the code. Adobe can read the code. Everyone can read and compile the code.

It is well supported by developers that take the source code and change it. It is now largely developed by volunteers.

RobertMaxey

Feature filled and well supported. You can use plugins and other things. For what it costs, I say try it. It is my current editor of choice. I find it useful for editing 600-DPI images and so far, it works well.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

sinatraman with great piety said: digital ... eliminated a constant cost in film and development and replaced it with a fixed cost of software.

Alas Sinatraman, you disparagingly accuse others as being hackers to make Gimp available to the huddled masses, (only the rich should have photo edit software) yet you have no qualms of conscience about putting many loyal Kodak workers devoted to making fine film out of work and destroying their retirement and the "father company" of photography.... careful lest you fall off that high horse while flaming with (digital not film) negative thoughts about open source!! Have you examined the digital code before making your accusation of plagiarism and rip off of Adobe Photoshop,,, who was the original photo editing programmer?

To quote: "Many programs, such as Microsoft Paint, existed before Adobe Photoshop," True that PS innovated the field of photo manipulation, but they based their work on the pioneers in digital,, perhaps some math scalar lost to history in their obscurity...
http://downloadphotoeditingsoftware.org/photo-effects-software

Today in Sunday School I shall preach on the sins of money gluteny as practiced by Adobe and praise the humanity and goodness of Open Source programs. And the SIN of flaming with out researching the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software

PS: Wikipedia is a free source compiled by the brotherhood (brotherhood being non-gender specific) and goodness of people who love to share knowledge without demanding profit.

RocketScientist Loc: Littleton, Colorado

Open Source Software is governed under the General Public License

This web site (and around 58% of all others) is run off an Apache server which is a free open source piece of software released under GPL.

screen48 Loc: Northwest IL

I do not like pirates either but I also do not like people like Adobe who overcharge and cause others to provide rip off software on Ebay and the like at $50 a pop because it is overpriced. For what PS costs, the lessons and plug ins should be free. PS is a money pit and I will take Corel any day.
What I really don't like is those imposing their opinions when they don't have proof that they will show to back that opinion.
So now prove it or zip it! Do you now Gimp like you know PS?

RobertMaxey

Who the F-Stop are you asking? I know Gimp because I use it. Before that, I used Corel Photo Draw. I refuse to buy PS because I will never use most of its capabilities. I will use Red's program for handling Red Raw files, but that's it.

Adobe is costly, but many people likely do not need it. Lots of great programs for less money. Do not like PS, simply avoid it; that will show 'em.

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

I used Gimp (and still do sometimes) for about 3 or 4 years. I mainly would use the software that came with my camera for simple stuff. If I needed something a little more functionality, then Gimp sufficed in most cases. I even found a Gimp filter that would allow me to use some (not all) Photoshop filters. Plus, I managed to get quite a few Gimp filters by using google and searching for them.
You can do a search on youtube and find a few "how-to"s with Gimp, that might help.

Cricket Loc: Southern Ohio

I've had GIMP for quite a while. Haven't used it much for photo stuff though--I use it for drawing/coloring. I quite like it and I think it's extremely easy to use

sinatraman Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant

google gimps history. i can't recall the exact article that sated it was created by a computer class who disceted a copy of photoshop. don't want to use photoshop buy correl or other companies product. I do support kodak mr pullum the paper i print my digital photos are made by kodak exclusively, the occasional film i purchase is kodak and developed on mahines that print with kodak paper. In addition it wwas kodak with nikon that invented digital photography, many of todays digital cameras use sensors made by you guessed it kodak. Its not my fault that the upper management of kodak was not as smart and skilled as the upper management of Fuji films who seemed to have transitioned to th 21st century. my point is people should be paid for their work, and not have it ripped off by pirates of any sort. If standing up for ethics puts me on a high horse then all i can say is "HI HO SILVER"

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

reverse engineering Photoshop isn't the same as stealing source code. It's highly doubtful that they were ever able to get source code to Photoshop.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Sinatraman, It is sad that the Father company of American Popular Public Photography has bit the dust. Agreed that pirates are a negative, although Adobe is a ripoff of another sort. No complaint about being ethical, however, one should not consider the open source movement as being copyright thieves. Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
Goggle history of open source operating system
Do not assume that MS and Adobe are poor folks getting ripped off do not assume that RCA was being ripped off by Major Edwin Armstrong.
So no complaints about your riding the High Horse, just do not shoot the wrong person (and do remember that according to the US Supreme Court companies are people!!! Humph..)

wlgoode Loc: Globe, AZ

Show me one single app that didn't borrow ideas from another.