[Zarafa]

Background: Apple is now the source for several applications that compete with high-profile products from other companies (examples: Final Cut Pro, Keynote, and Safari). Additionally, Apple seems to be adding functionality to existing OS X apps to obviate the need, at least in some cases, for other third-party tools (e.g. new Preview makes Adobe reader useless, Mail is acquiring at least some Exchange capabilites, TextEdit is getting some Word compatibility, etc.)

Questions: Would an Apple-developed professional image editing application be well-received and have a viable market as an alternative to Photoshop? Would Photoshop plug-in compatibility be required? How closely would a competing application have to follow the workflow principles and UI of Photoshop to be comfortable to designers?

Corollary 1: Is there appreciable discontent with the quality, price, or update cycle of Photoshop, as there so obviously is with e.g. Quark XPress, or are most users generally happy with the app as-is?

Corollary 2: Would designers, in general terms, be more likely to follow a platform (OS X) or an application (Photoshop) if one of them was going to change?

Random musing (with no evidence whatsoever to back this up): Whatever happened to TIFFany? Caffeine Software suspended operations quite suddenly, even though TIFFany, Curator, and PixelNHance were well-regarded applications. TIFFany had some UI quirks [holdovers from its NEXTSTEP/OpenStep genesis] that made it less than intuitive at times, but it nevertheless was an extremely capable application. A foundation such as TIFFany would seem to be a logical place from which to jump-start a "new" image-editing application, if such a thing were being considered.


Discuss.

[LeeG]

how about an OSX native/aquafied GIMP???

open source goodness, so sweet...


Lee

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Photoshop seems to be one of those apps that everyone loves. I don't see a need for Apple to come out with something better to fill a gap. Plus it will really piss off abobe.

[Zimphire]

I don't see this happening.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I don't see this happening.

Me either but I'd love to see Apple redoing the Photoshop GUI to make it prettier and match OSX more closely. They could use DVD Studio Pro's new skin for Photoshop too.

[Jan Van Boghout]

Everyone should have a look at Seashore: http://seashore.sourceforge.net/.

It has an incredible potential, and the author is setting up CVS after making some big changes. That could make it one of the coolest Mac open source programs ever!

[iOliverC]

I dunno, I think future Photoshop updates are going to be few and far between, there really is not much else they can add feature wise to an image program. I think a Apple PhotoPro would go down well with the Apple community, I would buy it. Just the interface of it (if it used DVD SP, which no doubt it would.) would maybe make me use it.

Price would also be a thing to consider, some can not afford PS 7, even though they need it. Maybe price it at $300-400?

[milhouse]

If this were to happen, which is not likely, it would be a bad idea. The platform needs developers and a variety of apps to select from.

[iOliverC]

I wonder if Adobe would license .psd to them if Apple was making such an app. I think its OK to open PSD's, but to edit I think you need a license (not sure).

[Arkham_c]

Apple would be stupid to do that. Take a great app that works well and replace it. Why? All of the iApps filled a need that was not being filled by third party software.

Premiere was crap. IE was crap. iPhoto had no equivalent. iTunes replaced SoundJam, because Apple thought everyone needed tunes.

[Ilja]

is there any plan to make an aquafied version of Gimp that anyone of you know of btw?

[Thain Esh Kelch]

I think it will ruin Apple's image quite a bit, if they launch a Photoshop-killer....
And anyway, the only thing that sucks with Photoshop, is its price!

But M$ did launch a wanna-B photo-editor-suit, if im not mistaken...

[Cadaver]

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch:
I think it will ruin Apple's image quite a bit, if they launch a Photoshop-killer....
And anyway, the only thing that sucks with Photoshop, is its price!

But for an average user, Photoshop Elements is the answer. And it can be had for less than the $99 retail price. And that's a whole lot less than, what, $400 for the full-blown Photoshop.

[OptimusG4]

Originally posted by Thain Esh Kelch:
I think it will ruin Apple's image quite a bit, if they launch a Photoshop-killer....
And anyway, the only thing that sucks with Photoshop, is its price!

But M$ did launch a wanna-B photo-editor-suit, if im not mistaken...

Photodraw? It's sh*t.

[Krypton]

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Everyone should have a look at Seashore: http://seashore.sourceforge.net/.

It has an incredible potential, and the author is setting up CVS after making some big changes. That could make it one of the coolest Mac open source programs ever!

Wow! That really does have some potential, how do gems like this go unnoticed

[JLL]

Originally posted by iOliverC:
I dunno, I think future Photoshop updates are going to be few and far between.

No, you can be very sure that Adobe will release updates every 18 months or so.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Krypton:
Wow! That really does have some potential, how do gems like this go unnoticed

Potential? Perhaps, but it will take years before it even comes close to Photoshop 1.0.

How old is GIMP? It's still very far from competing with Photoshop in a professional environment.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by Cadaver:
But for an average user, Photoshop Elements is the answer. And it can be had for less than the $99 retail price. And that's a whole lot less than, what, $400 for the full-blown Photoshop.

Ditto. It's all that 99% of users need. It's a great app, for a great price.

[Jan Van Boghout]

Originally posted by JLL:
Potential? Perhaps, but it will take years before it even comes close to Photoshop 1.0.

How old is GIMP? It's still very far from competing with Photoshop in a professional environment.

Well of course it doesn't become a huge thing like Photoshop 7 in a very short time, but your comparison with PS 1 is silly. Have you even tried it out? I already designed some cool little icons with it, its ability to edit pixel per pixel is just so much more accurate than PS. You can say it's more primitive, but it's oh so useful for me And over time it will evolve to become far greater than now. Hey, it's at 0.0.8!

Here are the icons I made entirely in Seashore:

[Ilja]

Originally posted by Ilja:
is there any plan to make an aquafied version of Gimp that anyone of you know of btw?

But still: why not help evolve gimp and make an aquafied version of it?

[JLL]

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Well of course it doesn't become a huge thing like Photoshop 7 in a very short time, but your comparison with PS 1 is silly.

It is? CMYK?

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
I already designed some cool little icons with it, its ability to edit pixel per pixel is just so much more accurate than PS.

Photoshop is not a drawing app - it's an image editor.

[Jan Van Boghout]

Originally posted by JLL:
It is? CMYK?

I can't say I've ever used CMYK , but then again I have never done any print work. It's all app and web graphics for me

Photoshop is not a drawing app - it's an image editor.

Says who? I use Photoshop 99% of the time to create entirely new work and not to modify existing images. So it all depends on how you use it

[JLL]

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
I can't say I've ever used CMYK

Perhaps not, but that is one of the core functions of an image editor - no app without CMYK support can even dream about touching Photoshop.

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Says who?

Um, Adobe? And most of it's users.

I know that you can make original work in it but it's not the main purpose of the app.

[Jan Van Boghout]

Originally posted by JLL:
Perhaps not, … <snip> … of the app.

Let's see what Adobe says:

Create exceptional imagery with easier access to file data; streamlined Web design; faster, professional-quality photo retouching; and more.

Now, tell me the difference between a drawing app and an image editor. The difference would be only the file you start from. If you open an existing document it's an image editor and if you start from scratch it's a drawing app?

Anyway, to get back to my original point, this is an application that will probably never be used in professional environments, but it has such an incredible potential for an everyday user. And don't act like Photoshop 1 was anywhere near as advanced as it is now. It was merely more than what you call a 'drawing app' , but given the time it was released in that was already revolutionary!

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
I know that you can make original work in it but it's not the main purpose of the app.

I think you're confused. Photoshop is for both Photographers *AND* Graphic Designers.

The main purpose of Photoshop is to edit/develop graphics.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
I think you're confused. Photoshop is for both Photographers *AND* Graphic Designers.

The main purpose of Photoshop is to edit/develop graphics.

By making original work i mean starting with a blank document and making every single pixel by yourself - that is to me a drawing app.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
By making original work i mean starting with a blank document and making every single pixel by yourself - that is to me a drawing app.

Yeah? That's what most Graphic Designers do.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Let's see what Adobe says:

Haha! Clever! You missed the first sentence:

"Adobe® Photoshop® 7.0 software, the professional image-editing standard."

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Now, tell me the difference between a drawing app and an image editor. The difference would be only the file you start from.

That's what I'm saying - you're using PS as a drawing app and doing single pixel editing. That's not Photoshop's main purpose and not one of it's strengths, but it's drawing tools are getting better and better.

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
If you open an existing document it's an image editor and if you start from scratch it's a drawing app?

To me an image is a photo not a drawing.

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Anyway, to get back to my original point, this is an application that will probably never be used in professional environments, but it has such an incredible potential for an everyday user. And don't act like Photoshop 1 was anywhere near as advanced as it is now. It was merely more than what you call a 'drawing app' , but given the time it was released in that was already revolutionary!

Drawing app is one of the last things I would call PS1 - it was almost solely a digital dark room with filters well known to photographers. That's why it's called Photoshop

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Yeah? That's what most Graphic Designers do.

And I would be willing to bet a nice sum of money that most of Photoshop's users handle photos in the app.

But let's stop here. My comment in an earlier post was just directed at those who often say that GIMP is a competitor to Photoshop - it's not even close when you look at Photoshop's main functions.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
And I would be willing to bet a nice sum of money that most of Photoshop's users handle photos in the app.

Boy, you're really stubborn

Just a little FYI, majority of Photoshop users are graphic designers, not photographers.

Photoshop Elements is what most Photographer use.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Boy, you're really stubborn

Just a little FYI, majority of Photoshop users are graphic designers, not photographers.

Photoshop Elements is what most Photographer use.

Just a little FYI - You don't have to be a photographer to handle photos - ever heard of print publishing?

And professional photographers do not use PS Elements in a professional environment - get real!

[iOliverC]

Originally posted by JLL:
Just a little FYI - You don't have to be a photographer to handle photos - ever heard of print publishing?

And professional photographers do not use PS Elements in a professional environment - get real!

[Sarc]Ye Adam, get real, in a pro enviroment they use Adobe Photoshop Album[/Sarc]

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
Just a little FYI - You don't have to be a photographer to handle photos - ever heard of print publishing?

And professional photographers do not use PS Elements in a professional environment - get real!

*sigh*

Use your common of sense please.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
*sigh*

Use your common of sense please.

What? You're trying to convince me that
there are more designers than photographers, printers, scanner operaterors, ad agencies, newspapers, magazines and so on using Photoshop out there?

Almost every photo you see in newspapers, ads, magazines, catalogues and on TV has been through Photoshop at least once.

And don't talk about common sense when you make comments about most photographers using Elements.

To get back on topic: if Apple should even think about making a PS alternative, they have to look at professional photo editing first.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
What? You're trying to convince me that
there are more designers than photographers, printers, scanner operaterors, ad agencies, newspapers, magazines and so on using Photoshop out there?

Almost every photo you see in newspapers, ads, magazines, catalogues and on TV has been through Photoshop at least once.

And don't talk about common sense when you make comments about most photographers using Elements.

Did I said anything about professional photographers?

No.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Did I said anything about professional photographers?

No.

Photoshop is a pro app.

I didn't even mention photographers in the post you made your photographers using PS Elements reply to:

"And I would be willing to bet a nice sum of money that most of Photoshop's users handle photos in the app."

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
Photoshop is a pro app.

I didn't even mention photographers in the post you made your photographers using PS Elements reply to:

"And I would be willing to bet a nice sum of money that most of Photoshop's users handle photos in the app."

Ok, I changed my opinion that you are right and all of us graphic designers know nothing.

Oh, guess what? CorelDraw's main purpose is Image Editor too!

They better change it to CorelPhoto or everyone will die of shock!

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Ok, I changed my opinion that you are right and all of us graphic designers know nothing.

How childish

I haven't said anything about it being impossible or wrong to draw or make original work in Photoshop - all I've been saying is that Photoshop's main purpose is editing photos and that's what most people use it for, and that GIMP is not a Photoshop alternative since it's missing most of Photoshops main features as an image editor.

But hey, what can you expect from someone who quotes a post but doesn't say anything related to that post.

Btw: CorelDRAW is a vector illustration app. Corel do have an image editor, but that's not CorelDRAW.

[Sarc]

I think Apple has the potential but won't do it, primarily no to piss off Adobe.
Some of the technologies Apple has built into OS X could be very well used in PS-like app, the Quartz engine for one, built-in support for most graphic formats ... etc.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by JLL:
How childish

I haven't said anything about it being impossible or wrong to draw or make original work in Photoshop - all I've been saying is that Photoshop's main purpose is editing photos and that's what most people use it for, and that GIMP is not a Photoshop alternative since it's missing most of Photoshops main features as an image editor.

But hey, what can you expect from someone who quotes a post but doesn't say anything related to that post.

Btw: CorelDRAW is a vector illustration app. Corel do have an image editor, but that's not CorelDRAW.

I apologize for arguing with you. Next time, I'll discuss only with someone who is less stubborn and more understandable. You could have said "Yeah, I understand what you mean" and that's it. Simple.

Your knowledge of Image Editor topic are pretty impressive for an IT Manager though.

[Zimphire]

Depending on what I am doing, I use Illustrator for the more complicated drawing stuff.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
I apologize for arguing with you. Next time, I'll discuss only with someone who is less stubborn and more understandable. You could have said "Yeah, I understand what you mean" and that's it. Simple.

I do understand waht you mean, but I do not agree that most Photoshop users are graphic designers - got it?

I haven't said anything about graphic designers not using Photoshop.

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Your knowledge of Image Editor topic are pretty impressive for an IT Manager though.

Well that's the knowledge you get when you have been working with Photoshop, Quark, Illustrator et al since 1993, and the knowledge you get when you become an IT manager at a company that has it's own graphics departments and photographers shooting 15K+ photos every year, plus the knowledge you get when you've been a betatester of Photoshop the last couple of versions.

[Ilja]

why do a lot of topics get spoiled because of some nitpicking on a stupids subject

[Jan Van Boghout]

Originally posted by Ilja:
why do a lot of topics get spoiled because of some nitpicking on a stupids subject

And it's all my fault!





Well anyway, before this turned into a debate over what Photoshop is/does, I just wanted to say that I really like Seashore and that it's extremely promising. Since I don't do anything with photos in Photoshop, but only make icons and other graphics (from scratch), it probably has a different meaning to mean than to JLL for example.

But for what I do with it, Seashore is a fresh breath in the world of Image Manipulation Programs (although it's very very very young)

[Sven G]

On the dreaming front, well, maybe Apple could help the KDE people to boost the development of Krita, which is a new Photoshop/Gimp wannabe (still at the early stages of development, AFAIK):



Anyway, GIMP 2.0 should be much better than the current one: so an Aqua version could indeed be appropriate.

Another possibility could be to make a (semi-)professional version of iPhoto: as with iDVD and DVD Studio Pro, there could be iPhoto and Photo Studio Pro - but that wouldn't make Adobe so happy, of course (see the recent stopping of the Premiere development for OS X, for example)...

[naphtali]

Originally posted by Ilja:
why do a lot of topics get spoiled because of some nitpicking on a stupids subject

Yes! I totally agree! It's so bloody annoying how some people just can't lose, thinking that they really are pro and know what pros use! Sheesh man (psssst - not you, JLL )


Anyway, back to the thread - I hope Apple doesn't get too Microsoft-ish by trying cover ever single aspect of the user experience. Yes, there's room for improvement for 3rd party apps (well Apple's aren't perfect to begin with) but it'd do Apple good to work with them rather than eliminate them. It's less straining on their resources too

[Jan Van Boghout]

Originally posted by naphtali:
Yes! I totally agree! It's so bloody annoying how some people just can't lose, thinking that they really are pro and know what pros use! Sheesh man (psssst - not you, JLL )

Ahum. Obviously you think you're very 'pro' If you were referring to me, I never claimed to be a pro in graphic design. If you are referring to Adam, get a grip. You surely haven't seen any of his work

Anyway, back to the thread - I hope Apple doesn't get too Microsoft-ish by trying cover ever single aspect of the user experience. Yes, there's room for improvement for 3rd party apps (well Apple's aren't perfect to begin with) but it'd do Apple good to work with them rather than eliminate them. It's less straining on their resources too

While I agree Apple shouldn't start making their own versions of everything, it's not like they should just go help out with Photoshop for nothing in return. Adobe has the responsibility of maintaining its apps, not Apple.

[naphtali]

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
Ahum. Obviously you think you're very 'pro' If you were referring to me, I never claimed to be a pro in graphic design. If you are referring to Adam, get a grip. You surely haven't seen any of his work

Well no I'm not pro in anything at all... Just a plain end user who's very interested in tech stuff.

Anyway yeah I was referring to Adam, even though I have already seen his work. It's just annoying to see how he puts down people with such decisive over-hasty generalization, as if he does indeed know everything in the world. But hey, that's just me.

Originally posted by Jan Van Boghout:
While I agree Apple shouldn't start making their own versions of everything, it's not like they should just go help out with Photoshop for nothing in return. Adobe has the responsibility of maintaining its apps, not Apple.

Well yeah ultimately it's Adobe's call, but Apple does have vested interests too in making sure that users have a good experience. Anyway I'm sure Apple's already working pretty closely with Adobe on things like G4 and G5 optimizations etc... Maybe they just need to breathe down Adobe's neck more often. The main idea is trying to take over such a huge task would prevent Apple from focusing on what it does best.

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by naphtali:
Anyway yeah I was referring to Adam, even though I have already seen his work. It's just annoying to see how he puts down people with such decisive over-hasty generalization, as if he does indeed know everything in the world. But hey, that's just me.

You sure know everything about me already after reading this one thread

If you've read my other posts, you'll see that I'm very eager to learn new tips/information about graphic designs. I still have lot of things to learn.

I'm not acting like I know everything, I'm just sharing from my experiences and what other experienced people told me.

[Ilja]

*sigh*

can't you guys go play outside or something...