Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Feb 2006 20:30 UTC, submitted by Franck
Graphics, User Interfaces "Libre Graphics Meeting will bring together developers and users of the best of free software graphics applications - GIMP, Inkscape, Scribus, Blender and more. It promises to be a fun ride, with tutorials and presentations of applications, and lots of time and space to chat, meet up with old friends, make new ones. Plans will be made, hacking and drawing will be done, fun will be had. The conference is free to attend, and open to all."
Order by: Score:
Seriously...
by Joe User on Mon 27th Feb 2006 20:52 UTC
Joe User
Member since:
2005-06-29

Are there *professional* designers who use GIMP for production?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Seriously...
by leech on Mon 27th Feb 2006 21:46 UTC in reply to "Seriously..."
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

Of course there are. A lot of the movie production studios use it, along with Film Gimp. http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT7096363910.html

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Seriously...
by JrezIN on Tue 28th Feb 2006 00:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Seriously..."
JrezIN Member since:
2005-06-29

These to projects aren't related anymore... In fact, CinePaint[1] is even droping GTK and most of GIMP's codebase.

[1] http://cinepaint.org/

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Seriously...
by leech on Tue 28th Feb 2006 07:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Seriously..."
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

So you're comparing a CVS Research version based on FLTK and Perl against the released version of Cinepain that has been changed to Film Gimp?

Looks to me like they're both being developed in parallel. The reason the other version is going with FLTK according to the web site is "Glasgow Windows Upgrading to FLTK 1.1.7 to eliminate window resize issue."

Just sounds to me like they're doing it because the Windows version of Cinepaint/Film Gimp is just horribly broken.

Leech

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Seriously...
by Vargol on Tue 28th Feb 2006 13:41 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Seriously..."
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

The reason for moving to FLTK was many fold, mostly due to Win32 GTK 1.x issues and the moving to C++.

Robin describes his reasons here...

http://cinepaint.bigasterisk.com/WhyMigrateFromGTKToFLTK

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Seriously...
by JrezIN on Tue 28th Feb 2006 18:20 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Seriously..."
JrezIN Member since:
2005-06-29

As Vargol pointed, there's a big list why dropping GTK+ makes sense to this project.

The case is, I was talking about CinePaint and Gimp aren't related anymore. The GTK+ dropping was just an example (it's a huge difference between programs now). Other differences, like support for lager than 8bit per channel support, image file formats, and even the own program file format not compatible anymore (even if the extension still the same)
Actually, for many years now...

So, when someone asks "Are there *professional* designers who use GIMP for production?", it doesn't make sense to talk about CinePaint... they're just different and not related anymore. (but I'm sure that GIMP's used by lots of professionals... Even if the list could be a larger...)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Seriously...
by yanik on Mon 27th Feb 2006 21:51 UTC in reply to "Seriously..."
yanik Member since:
2005-07-13

Real pro won't use it before it gains full CMYK support.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Seriously...
by prokoudine on Mon 27th Feb 2006 22:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Seriously..."
prokoudine Member since:
2005-08-09

> Real pro won't use it before it gains full CMYK support.

You forgot L*a*b ;) And Krita has both

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Seriously...
by Vargol on Tue 28th Feb 2006 13:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Seriously..."
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

So I take it you think that every pro that uses an image editing application requires CMYK.

Hate to tell you this but there are many professions where the images never go any where near a printing press.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Seriously...
by prokoudine on Tue 28th Feb 2006 14:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Seriously..."
prokoudine Member since:
2005-08-09

@Vargol

> Hate to tell you this but there are many professions where the images never go any where near a printing press.

I think he is referring to designers and photographers in the first place and in that case he is quite right. Some designers don't need CMYK/L*a*b, but these ones work on web-design and/or icons (like Jimmac or Tigert or Garret).

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Seriously...
by Vargol on Tue 28th Feb 2006 16:22 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Seriously..."
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

@prokoudine

So in your are those people "like Jimmac" not "real pro's" or is yanik wrong when he states that "real pro's" will not use GIMP until there is CMYK support.

The point that is trying to creep out here is that
GIMP does not require CMYK support for "real pro's" to use it, but that some people require CMYK support
in order from GIMP to be useful to them.

Those are quite different facts.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Seriously...
by prokoudine on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 02:26 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Seriously..."
prokoudine Member since:
2005-08-09

@Vargol

I don't understand you. If you are still keeping your eye on this thread, please explain what you meant.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Seriously...
by Vargol on Thu 2nd Mar 2006 12:12 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Seriously..."
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

Yanik said that "real pro's" would not use GIMP until it got CMYK suport.

I disagreed, pointing out that there are people who manipulate images for a living, i.e. "real pro's", that do not need CMYK.

You then said that you "think he is referring to designers and photographers in the first place and in that case he is quite right".

Yanik himself had made so such distinction, which lead to me asking if that meant you considered those image manipulation professionals who are not "designers and photographers" not be be "real pro's".

Finally I said 'GIMP does not require CMYK support for "real pro's" to use it, but that some people require CMYK support in order from GIMP to be useful to them.' This was an attempt to point out the CMYK criticism is a poor one. It's like a DTP user moaning that Word lacks a vital DTP function. GIMP is not aimed at pre-press users, its not a fair critique that GIMP lacks a vital pre-press function. Or to use a car anology, its like a Land Rover owner complaining his Maclaren F1 does not have four wheel drive.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Seriously...
by zerblat on Tue 28th Feb 2006 02:41 UTC in reply to "Seriously..."
zerblat Member since:
2005-07-06
RE: Seriously...
by DeadFishMan on Tue 28th Feb 2006 03:23 UTC in reply to "Seriously..."
DeadFishMan Member since:
2006-01-09

Are there *professional* designers who use GIMP for production?

Well, GIMP can't be used for press work since it lacks CMYK and Lab support but it can be and is used for everything else, including web design. I, for instance, use it in together with Blender a lot to create UV maps for my 3D models, desaturate and perform other small adjustments on Blender renders, composing artwork to be used on my webpages, animated banners, etc.

It is a great tool, regardless of what some people here might think.

Reply Score: 2

for all the fellow blenderheads on osnews
by SEJeff on Mon 27th Feb 2006 21:10 UTC
SEJeff
Member since:
2005-11-05

There *are* professional studios who use Blender. Blender was used in the preproduction of Spiderman II:
http://www.blender.org/cms/Animatics_for_Motion_P.393.0.html

Like vi, blenders interface was designed for speed and flexibility, not usability. The video tutorials are very easy to follow if you have the bandwidth to download them:
http://www.blender.org/cms/Video_Tutorials.396.0.html

I can't speak for gimp, but blender is a great tool and even in use by *professional* designers.

Reply Score: 2

madhatter Member since:
2005-07-07

you can also find a nice ebook for blender here:
http://www.cdschools.org/54223045235521/blank/browse.asp?A=383&BMDR...

Reply Score: 1

a Big one missing
by Matt Giacomini on Mon 27th Feb 2006 21:15 UTC
Matt Giacomini
Member since:
2005-07-06

Why is ImageMagick not included?

Reply Score: 2

RE: a Big one missing
by prokoudine on Mon 27th Feb 2006 21:29 UTC in reply to "a Big one missing"
prokoudine Member since:
2005-08-09

Included in what? ;)

If IM's developers want to come, they come. If they don't want to come, then they don't come.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: a Big one missing
by Matt Giacomini on Mon 27th Feb 2006 23:28 UTC in reply to "RE: a Big one missing"
Matt Giacomini Member since:
2005-07-06

Sorry that is what I meant. I wonder why they are not getting themselves involved.

Reply Score: 1

Gimp vs Cinepaint
by Dark_Knight on Tue 28th Feb 2006 02:11 UTC
Dark_Knight
Member since:
2005-07-10

While Cinepaint is more suited for film work I find Gimp more appealing not only to use but also look at. Though it's puzzling that the Gimp project team hasn't coded the software to support 32-bit High Dynamic Range (HDR). If they did then Gimp would actually be able to compete with Adobe's Photoshop CS 2.0. Otherwise with out HDR support Gimp is just a pale imitation.

Edited 2006-02-28 02:12

Reply Score: 1

RE: Gimp vs Cinepaint
by drag on Tue 28th Feb 2006 13:30 UTC in reply to "Gimp vs Cinepaint"
drag Member since:
2006-02-28

While Cinepaint is more suited for film work I find Gimp more appealing not only to use but also look at. Though it's puzzling that the Gimp project team hasn't coded the software to support 32-bit High Dynamic Range (HDR). If they did then Gimp would actually be able to compete with Adobe's Photoshop CS 2.0. Otherwise with out HDR support Gimp is just a pale imitation.

Gimp is currently limited by it's architecture.

It simply does not scale at all and is very limited. As soon as you start to try to edit some of the larger images created by today's cameras Gimp will simply hit a brick wall.

Gimp developers have designed a solution to this called Gegl which should remove bottlenecks and allow gimp to do this 'high dynamic range' type stuff, but right now nobody is realy working on it. There is simply not that many developers and they are more then busy.

With Gegl you should be able to do 16 bit per channel colors with no sweat. You'd be able to do transformation layers and all sorts of other fancy things that Photoshop can boast about. As well as removing the performance bottleneck for very large images.

Unfortunately Gegl needs more attention from developers if it's expected to go anywere.

The thing about Cinepaint is that it's special purpose. It's going to be lousy for editing photographs for instance.. but it's great at doing things like editing arrows into the Lord of the Ring movies for battle sequences at 32bit per channel color resolutions.


As for CYMK support and such.. It's realy realy realy pointless unless your working with professional printing systems. And Gimp has limited CYMK anyways.

In Linux if you want to build documents generally you setup your color profiles (not fun at all in Linux) and use Gimp or Krita to create/edit bitmapped images and Inkscape for vector based images. Then you take that and use Scribus (desktop publishing application) to build your documents and add text and such. In their you will deal with CYMK issues and setup things for printing.

Reply Score: 2

Libre Graphics Meeting
by AndyFitz on Tue 28th Feb 2006 05:58 UTC
AndyFitz
Member since:
2006-02-28

The meeting will be great.
Developers and users alike will get some real perspective on how free software impacts the creative industries.

I can't wait to meet the friends I've never met and interact with the free graphics community together as one.

Dave Neary should be given a medal for organising this; it's going to be awesome!!

- AndyFitz

Reply Score: 2