On Monday 25 August 2003 9:32 pm, Branko Collin wrote:

Sometimes, when I get bored, I start scouring forums on the net for GIMP related chat. Of course, it's extra double plus fun to search Adobe.com's forums for talk of the GIMP. Most of it is talk about GIMP-print, of course.

--==+++==--

So, did you guys know that Disney considered using the GIMP and/or Cinepaint, but instead paid some coders to make sure PS runs in WINE?

Yup.

I saw this over on slashdot. And when I commented there something about preferring to see th GIMP, if not for anything else, for the free-software question, I got some 15 replies flaming me all over.

JS ->

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:

So, did you guys know that Disney considered using the GIMP and/or Cinepaint, but instead paid some coders to make sure PS runs in WINE?

Yup.

When this was on Slashdot I did mention at least in a PS at the end of one of my mails.
/me thinks of searching the archive
but is the archive working again?
will the alternative link suggested be up to date (last time I looked it was lagging by a few days) ...
but anyway I am logged in on a console, so I'll skip finding a link this time.

I saw this over on slashdot. And when I commented there something about preferring to see th GIMP, if not for anything else, for the free-software question, I got some 15 replies flaming me all over.

1) You will probably get flamed no matter what you say on Slashdot, although I am would be interested to read exactly what you wrote.

2) Gimp and CinePaint were incidental to the article, the big deal was that Disney *EVIL* actually spent some money and helped improve WINE *GOOD* (although some looonatics object to WINE on a twisted notion that compatability with legacy applications is a bad idea).

3) They probably only evaluated GIMP 1.2, and even though GIMP 1.3 is a lot better I dont think any of you will deny there is 'room for improvement'

4) Although there are some tradeoffs CinePaint better fills the niche for a movie studio, higher colour depth and support for file formats such as OpenEXR are important.

5) Adobe Photoshop users, particularly proffesional artists love Adobe Photoshop. Price is not really an issue when the company is paying (up to a point, companies will eventually draw the line (no pun intended)) GIMP/CinePaint needs to be more than just as good, it needs to be significantly better for that kind of specialist user to make the effort to change.

The killer feature(s) in the GIMP is freedom, and so cheap it is free. Proffessionals who depend on Adobe Photoshop are probably the last people that will convert to the GIMP. The value they place on Photoshop is not just the box price, it is the years of time and effort invested into learning it inside out and more.

However after saying all that a whole lot could have been done to improve the GIMP or (and you are not going to like me for saying this) more likely CinePaint, with the hefty amount of money that Disney was willing to spend on this project.

Perhaps if Adobe Photoshop 8 fails to maintain WINE compatibility they will look this way again.

Has anyone mailed the man at Disney yet? I probably will, and encourage him to provide feedback, hopefully with a little more detail than just make it more like Photoshop.
He seems to be in some way affiliated with CinePaint already (I forget his name but I looked it up when the article was first mentioned).

- Alan

Alan Horkan wrote:

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:

So, did you guys know that Disney considered using the GIMP and/or Cinepaint, but instead paid some coders to make sure PS runs in WINE?

Yup.

When this was on Slashdot I did mention at least in a PS at the end of one of my mails.
/me thinks of searching the archive
but is the archive working again?
will the alternative link suggested be up to date (last time I looked it was lagging by a few days)

Let it be. I actually remember a post on this list, and it should be this one.

...
but anyway I am logged in on a console, so I'll skip finding a link this time.

I saw this over on slashdot. And when I commented there something about preferring to see th GIMP, if not for anything else, for the free-software question, I got some 15 replies flaming me all over.

1) You will probably get flamed no matter what you say on Slashdot, although I am would be interested to read exactly what you wrote.

I am finding out that trying to defend free software brigns more flames and bad moderation than other subjects. :-) I will try to find my post and paste it at the end of this message.

2) Gimp and CinePaint were incidental to the article, the big deal was that Disney *EVIL* actually spent some money and helped improve WINE *GOOD* (although some looonatics object to WINE on a twisted notion that compatability with legacy applications is a bad idea).

Correct, that is what the article was about

3) They probably only evaluated GIMP 1.2, and even though GIMP 1.3 is a lot better I dont think any of you will deny there is 'room for improvement'

4) Although there are some tradeoffs CinePaint better fills the niche for a movie studio, higher colour depth and support for file formats such as OpenEXR are important.

Dunno. The only cinepaint I had seen was called "filmgimp"

5) Adobe Photoshop users, particularly proffesional artists love Adobe Photoshop. Price is not really an issue when the company is paying (up to a point, companies will eventually draw the line (no pun intended)) GIMP/CinePaint needs to be more than just as good, it needs to be significantly better for that kind of specialist user to make the effort to change. >
The killer feature(s) in the GIMP is freedom, and so cheap it is free. Proffessionals who depend on Adobe Photoshop are probably the last people that will convert to the GIMP. The value they place on Photoshop is not just the box price, it is the years of time and effort invested into learning it inside out and more.

Actually, one of the many replies pointed to this: Disney, better, the departament that went Wine/photoshop, actually tried pushing GIMP or CinePaint, but got a big No from the artists. That means you are completely right, Alan.

However after saying all that a whole lot could have been done to improve the GIMP or (and you are not going to like me for saying this) more likely CinePaint, with the hefty amount of money that Disney was willing to spend on this project.

Perhaps if Adobe Photoshop 8 fails to maintain WINE compatibility they will look this way again.

Has anyone mailed the man at Disney yet? I probably will, and encourage him to provide feedback, hopefully with a little more detail than just make it more like Photoshop.
He seems to be in some way affiliated with CinePaint already (I forget his name but I looked it up when the article was first mentioned).

- Alan

My post on /. on this subject was: (I am Pope Raymond Lama there)

__ Re:Disney supporting open-source? (Score:*, Insightful) by Pope Raymond Lama (57277) on Tue Aug 05, '03 12:25 PM (#6616021) (http://www.geocities.com/gwidion23)

No. Disney non-supporting Open Source, as it has always been.

Now, instead of using, and helping improving The GIMP, "linux people"
will just run their pirated Photoshops and be happy, as oftenly such users
do not know the difference between free and proprietary software.

--
-> brains explode with conflict.
--

Money follows votes; it does not buy votes. Two legs better!
__

URLs follow:
/. Article:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/05/1552255

/. Comment:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=73635&threshold=2&commentsort=0&tid=106&mode=thread&cid=6616021

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:

So, did you guys know that Disney considered using the GIMP and/or Cinepaint, but instead paid some coders to make sure PS runs in WINE?

I am finding out that trying to defend free software brigns more flames and bad moderation than other subjects. :-) I will try to find my post and paste it at the end of this message.

4) Although there are some tradeoffs CinePaint better fills the niche for a movie studio, higher colour depth and support for file formats such as OpenEXR are important.

Dunno. The only cinepaint I had seen was called "filmgimp"

Well now they call it CinePaint, which better distinguishes the niche it is trying to fill. I believe there is an important place for CinePaint, and that its clear focus is admirable. I can only hope that in future some compatibility can be regained and become more like different parts of the same family, if you'll forgive the comparision more like Adobe Photoshop Elements is to Adobe Image Ready.

5) Adobe Photoshop users, particularly proffesional artists love Adobe Photoshop. Price is not really an issue when the company is paying (up to a point, companies will eventually draw the line (no pun intended)) GIMP/CinePaint needs to be more than just as good, it needs to be significantly better for that kind of specialist user to make the effort to change. >
The killer feature(s) in the GIMP is freedom, and so cheap it is free. Proffessionals who depend on Adobe Photoshop are probably the last people that will convert to the GIMP. The value they place on Photoshop is not just the box price, it is the years of time and effort invested into learning it inside out and more.

Actually, one of the many replies pointed to this: Disney, better, the departament that went Wine/photoshop, actually tried pushing GIMP or CinePaint, but got a big No from the artists. That means you are completely right, Alan.

I can only hope that the developers will consider copying Photoshop more often unless there are particularly good reasons to do otherwise.

My post on /. on this subject was: (I am Pope Raymond Lama there)

Re:Disney supporting open-source? (Score:*, Insightful) by Pope Raymond Lama (57277) on Tue Aug 05, '03 12:25 PM (#6616021) (http://www.geocities.com/gwidion23)

No. Disney non-supporting Open Source, as it has always been.

supporting Wine, is supporting open source. it would of course be more forward looking to support the Gimp rather than a back-compatibility layer, but I am pleasantly surprised if Disney makes any contribution at all to open source or free software.

Now, instead of using, and helping improving The GIMP, "linux people"
will just run their pirated Photoshops and be happy, as oftenly such users
do not know the difference between free and proprietary software.

I might have moderated that Funny, although it was more likely to be considered harsh. People take accusations of 'piracy' (unlicensed use) of software personally, guilty conscience methinks. I also really doubt that someone would go to all the trouble of running Linux, and Wine to pirate Photoshop on Linux instead of taking the easy option and just using Windows.

Usually on slashdot people say it differently more silly like "free software, what do you mean it is not free, I downloaded it off the internet"

In reply to:

Disney supporting open-source? (Score:5, Funny) by Prince_Ali (614163) on Tue Aug 05, '03 12:13 PM (#6615846) (Last Journal: Sun Oct 27, '02 05:19 PM)

I can feel the slashdotters' brains explode with conflict. --

Money follows votes; it does not buy votes. Two legs better!

I have learned to expect little intelligent feedback from slashdot, there are a few exceptions but they only prove the rule that most of Slashdot is utter dross and not worth reading at below Score:4 or 5.

The GIMP user and developers lists is one of the few places where you are most likely to get well thought out feedback on the GIMP. Everywhere else you will probably get flamed, although I expect there will be some really positive feedback when Gimp 2.0 is released (much more than any criticism over the number jump).

Later

Alan