GIMP or Photoshop

[MkII]

The principles used and the structure of menus is similar across apps, most seem to want to emulate the PS standard - so learning GIMP _is_ learning skills that can be used in industry imho. Better in fact, if you can get used to several, rather than be dependant on one apps system for doing things.

[DarkLight]

I disagree with using GIMP. If you teach your students a subject like Graphic Design then you should use the industry standard, regardless. The industry standard is what the professionals in the industry use, and your students are the next professionals.

 

If your courses don't rely on image manipulation and vector graphics software then I can see where you might choose something else like GIMP or a cheaper than Photoshop equivalent but otherwise I would say go for Photoshop if you can afford it.

 

Regardless of how similar GIMP is, employers don't want GIMP; employers want Photoshop and the industry standard software. Software such as MatLab are not a secondary school taught specialism, but more suited to University degree teaching.

[CyberNerd]

... and students in football classes should wear a specific brand of professional footballers boots regardless of whether standard football boots could be used to teach a technique.

 

Plenty of schools use MSAccess because it meets the standard for the course as set by the examination board, but it is rarely chosen in industry over MSSQL/MySQL/Oracle. Gimp does what is requires for GCSE/Alevel graphic design and therefore it meets the standard for the course.

 

I don't think that schools should be expected, or even encouraged to meet the costs of a niche industry because only a small portion of a GCSE/Alevel design course is going to require image manipulation that goes beyond cropping and enlarging. If a piece of work is has been image manipulated using the higher features of PS/GIMP it may not even be regarded as the students 'own work' by the exam board, more like the programmers work.

[torledo]

... and students in football classes should wear a specific brand of professional footballers boots regardless of whether standard football boots could be used to teach a technique.

 

Plenty of schools use MSAccess because it meets the standard for the course as set by the examination board, but it is rarely chosen in industry over MSSQL/MySQL/Oracle. Gimp does what is requires for GCSE/Alevel graphic design and therefore it meets the standard for the course.

 

I don't think that schools should be expected, or even encouraged to meet the costs of a niche industry because only a small portion of a GCSE/Alevel design course is going to require image manipulation that goes beyond cropping and enlarging. If a piece of work is has been image manipulated using the higher features of PS/GIMP it may not even be regarded as the students 'own work' by the exam board, more like the programmers work.

 

What exactly is a niche industry - the graphic design business. While there are any different functions within graphic design and print industry....photoshop as one or two people have said IS an industry standard within the field. Unfortunately it's not good enough for students to learn something that looks and sounds like photoshop....not that gimp does anything of the sorts. As for you're argument about the work of programmers, yes it's a hell of an achievement by the legions of programmers and sometimes with PS you do get the feeling the abilities of the programm is what is creating the final output rather than you're own technical and artistic ability. But professionals aren't so hit and miss with the programme...they know exactly what they're doing to create the result they're looking for. Most photographic work is gentle retouching not polarize effects left, right and center as is often the case at GCSE. IF you're going to teach photoshop don't teach the bells and whistles crap.

 

Also saying there are equivalent apps to photoshop is saying having experience of using various cheap and cheerful backup applications is going to prepare you to work as a netbackup or TSM professional, it does nothing of the sort - these applications have there own command-line arguments and quirks that merely knowing A N Other backup application is enough....it isn't, not by a long chalk.

 

Same with photoshop, it has it's own unique functions and features that require product-specific experience. A user of gimp is in no better a position to undertake photoshop training than someone who's never touched a 'design' application any more complicated than paint.

 

You have a point about the cost, and the requirements at GCSE level, and many pupils will have no need to reacquaint with photoshop at A-level, degree or in employement again. So it's a bit of a waste, but i agree with the principle of using industry standards. Particularly in respect to web design and video editing....all these macs all over the place in schools and how many are using Final cut express or After effects ? It's criminal the opportunities that are being missed with using macs.

 

btw i agree with another poster - fireworks is fab. And should be treated as an industry standard for web image design. fireworks is used extensively by web designers worth their salt, it could be argued fireworks has a better claim to being a staple in GCSE over photoshop.

 

After all web design is anything but 'niche'

[CyberNerd]

I meant that computer graphics are a small area of a design course compared for example to the scientific industry. Yet 'industry standard' scientific applications are not taught in schools because teachers are expected to teach the fundamentals of science rather than the bells and whistles.

 

I really don't think that for simple work that photoshop should be considered the tool of choice these days. Several years ago, photoshop *was* the only tool that could do most image manipulation work, but things have moved on and the level that students need to work at do not justify the complexity of the program, especially if teachers are bound by exam board rules not to let the advanced features 'create' the piece of work.

 

If schools are teaching courses for specific applications, eg a "how to use photoshop course" then of course it's irreplaceable. (except you then find the teachers say "we want elements" cos its easier to use.....)

 

I agree web design is anything but 'niche', it is a large field. CMS usage, theme creation, databases, and a plethora of different languages and standards - The real standards like HTML,XML etc

[torledo]

I meant that computer graphics are a small area of a design course compared for example to the scientific industry. Yet 'industry standard' scientific applications are not taught in schools because teachers are expected to teach the fundamentals of science rather than the bells and whistles.

 

I really don't think that for simple work that photoshop should be considered the tool of choice these days. Several years ago, photoshop *was* the only tool that could do most image manipulation work, but things have moved on and the level that students need to work at do not justify the complexity of the program, especially if teachers are bound by exam board rules not to let the advanced features 'create' the piece of work.

 

If schools are teaching courses for specific applications, eg a "how to use photoshop course" then of course it's irreplaceable. (except you then find the teachers say "we want elements" cos its easier to use.....)

 

I agree web design is anything but 'niche', it is a large field. CMS usage, theme creation, databases, and a plethora of different languages and standards - The real standards like HTML,XML etc

 

that's the thing isn't it ? when does teaching theory and good practice then cross over into something vendor specific. Take the example of web design, yes all those things you've mentioned should be taught....but practically every web designer and web editor job i've seen advertised includes dreamweaver as a prerequisite skill. A lot also include photoshop as pre-req, so you get to the stage where apps used in industry need to be taught in addition to the theory and technical standards.

 

Would a network+ course be anywhere near as successful as the CCNA academy course ? No way. The big attraction of the CCNA is relating the theory to industry standard vendor specific kit, namly Cisco......i know all you HP fanboys are going to whine at me for saying Cisco is industry standard, but in the routing world it's Cisco and Juniper. In the enteprise it's Cisco all the way. Sure the theory is covered, but it's getting you're hands dirty with the routers, switches and firewalls that is such a significant part of the course.

 

I agree with you in a way that there's plenty of scope at A-level and degree to teach the vendor apps to an appropriate level, plus there's the added advantage that in most cases the budget is there aswell.

 

There's a plethora of apps for basic image manipulation, and sometimes you just need the most cost effective and usable tool to, for instance crop or resize a photo for use in a powerpoint presentation.....but i personally like to use photoshop for even basic image mainpulation tasks, Paint shop pro is pretty good for simple tasks aswell. Photoshop is one of those apps that follows you throughout you're education experience when you cover any subect IT or media related, i think it's good to expose Y11's to it to give them a headstart.

[Ric_]

I think that rather than the 'you must have photoshop' discussion that this has turned in to, it may be worth revisiting the OP.

 

bishopsgarthstockton is simply refreshing the ICT in the Art department. IMHO you should wait until being asked for these apps before buying and installing them because they simply won't be used.

 

I have GIMP installed across school and I personally like it. We cannot afford Creative Suite or Photoshop but the 'Creative Design' department has decided that Fireworks and GIMP don't quite satisfy the needs of their course so they are now purchasing Photoshop Elements.

[cookie_monster]

Just having a play with the latest version of GIMP 2.4.5 and i've noticed that it now obeys system policy so you can hide the C: drive from prying eyes. You can still browse the network though i noticed that i can look in netlogon and the 'hidden' files are displayed but it's an improvement.

[spookingdorf]

If the Art dept didn't ask for photoshop specifically, it's unlikely that they really want/need it. In the meantime, until they do you could install GIMP across the network for free and see if the kids start using it (they will). GIMP has many, many more tools than students are ever likely to use and they can always write their own tools (brushes, patterns, scripts, etc) as they wish. And if nobody uses it at all, you have lost nothing except the setup time. OTOH, buying photoshop and having nobody use it would be a very expensive futile exercise.

 

Students are adaptable. Employers want people who can think and work things out for themselves. If students are able to use GIMP/Photoshop, they can work out how to use Photoshop/GIMP. They can use all the basic tools and they can get into more elaborate things if they need to.

 

OTOH, if you want them to use something that is a little above basic level but is nicely usable, there are a few great ones about - Splashup, Aviary, Photoshop Express spring to mind. No-cost solution anyone? Just get registered and away you go. Get teh Art Department into the Web 2.0 21st Century.

[Edu-IT]

Is Gimp still not friendly for network wide use?

[cpjitservices]

lol well be warned if you use GIMP< we had a short cut on the desktop to this program and the short cut to the program was called GIMP and the amount of complaints we have was unbelievable so we had to change the name of the short cut

[Edu-IT]

Like it!

[bondbill2k2]

What about photoshop elements?

[monkeytomillionaire]

Although PS and GIMP are fairly equally hostile to new users (GIMP with "strange" file dialogs and multiple windows - yes I know both can be sort of cured using plugins and modified versions) and PS (just &^%^& awkward to do simple stuff) I think users will always want go with the one that looks most "Windows" like - e.g. PS.

 

I'd personally load GIMP and Paint.net and explain how you can save money but YMMV

 

regards

 

Simon

 

yes i agree with u dude.. but i prefer choose Photoshop... i friendly with it