Eccentric Flower talk:201005/I Hate Everything

Columbina:

Addendum: Blake raised a completely understandable point about paint programs on Twitter, and since I was clearly unclear, I'd better clarify here, especially for those of you who found the software rant interesting and skipped the angst:

I have a photo sorting/tagging/categorizing/editing tool. I got it after two weeks of comparison shopping and testing, and paid a pretty penny for it. (I don't think it was $400, though.) I have, um, sort of advanced needs there. (How advanced? I have cataloging needs for a body of 180,000 files across 7500 folders - about 13 GB. Some programs never survive past trying to index the whole lot. They simply look at it and die.) It's called ACDSee, and is a good product despite a dumb name.

When I have to do image work which seems more suited to a Photoshop-like approach, I use the Gimp. It's free, and though it suffers from Open Source Clutter and a rather cryptic interface, it has served me well for my very occasional image edits in the post-Painter hiatus. I don't plan to abandon it entirely.

The part that needs a special solution is an interface that is comfortable to me for freehand drawing. To do illustration from scratch with a pen, I need something that mimics my pencil-and-paper process almost exactly or I simply won't/can't use it. Painter is the only software of the many I've tried that fits the bill.

-- 02:23, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Ysabel:

Have you played any with Illustrator? It has the problem that you have to understand what to set up to get it to work the way you're talking about, but if you do that it works really, really well for that. It's probably not going to make you as happy as your old Painter (for the "you have to understand what to set up" reasons) but it's the best of anything I've tried (including a sample version of Painter) for just...drawing.

-- 03:20, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Iain:

Corel does at least give you a fully functional 30-day trial copy so you can decide whether or not they've ruined Painter. (Last I saw, they'd managed not to ruin Paint Shop Pro, but that was a while back.) My guess, knowing absolutely nothing about the program, is that you might also need Painter SketchPad, just going from the name.

As for the angsting, if the process of creating makes you feel better for more than 30 seconds -- and given the amount of time it would take, I should think it could do that, at least -- then perhaps it might be worth it. And as for people giving a fuck ... well, you'll never know unless you create it and put it out there, now will you?

-- 03:57, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Spc476:

But Robert is right about what the market will bear. (Does this mean you'll suddenly materialize here in Boca Raton?)

Two stories, related. Back in 1994 (95? I don't fully remember now) I worked at Galacticomm (for all of two weeks because I felt their coding style was horrendous, but that's another story) who's major (well, at that time, *only*) product was the MajorBBS, a multiuser BBS for MS-DOS (in that it allowed one to run a BBS with up-to 256 modems at once) that sold for $300.

I was hired to help with the Unix port of the product. They apparently did some market research and found that there was a sizable market willing to pay for a Unix BBS system[1] (and at the time, this meant HP-UX, SunOS, AIX, Irix, and SCO (may they rot in Hell)). Not only that, but said people would be willing pay $3,000 per copy for the Unix version.

The Unix people were happy. The MS-DOS people where *pissed!* Surprising, considering the amount the respective parties paid, but the MS-DOS people wanted a Linux version (and ironically enough, the major port was done under Linux, but not initially sold) but Galacticomm refused to sell a Linux version because they knew they couldn't get $3,000 a copy, and a $300 version would taint their Unix mark. But the MS-DOS people wanted a more capable OS to run the MajorBBS.

Why the high price point for Unix? For a piece of software that shared 95% of the code base with MS-DOS? Because of perceived value. A Unix product (remember, early 90s) for only $300? What's wrong with it? Way too cheap, let's look elsewhere. The (non-Linux) Unix shops were used to paying through the nose (witness SCO where you paid extra for /bin/sh).

A few years later (97? 98? Again, it's been a while) I was consulting at another company who were porting their Windows application to Unix (I lasted longer than two weeks here---they didn't have nearly as stupid a coding standard) as well as a few other obscure computer systems. Their software sold for anywhere from $1,500 (Windows) to $50,000 (big iron) per copy, depending on the platform.

For $1,500 you got a nice box, a few manuals and a couple of disks with the program. For $50,000 you got a floppy and three photo-copied pages. But the folks willing to pay $50,000 were running huge iron---stuff that was larger than a desk, leased for thousands per month, and took a dedicated staff to run.

Again, a different market.

[1]Once the Internet went mainstream in 1994, I saw the BBS scene as dead, yet this company (and plenty of friends in the BBS scene) were chin deep in the Nile, frantically exclaiming that this whole Internet thang was a passing fad. Perhaps it's good I only lasted two weeks there.

-- 08:57, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Patrick:

You have this crisis a lot, regarding creating. It seems that you really dislike the act of creating stuff, but like the feeling of having created stuff, if that makes sense. The work of it doesn't satisfy you, it seems to me, it's the hope that the result of that work will bring you something.

I don't know that there's a solution (and I'm gun-shy about suggesting anything, because that always leads to you telling me and anybody else how we're wrong, we don't understand your snowflake-unique brain, etc.), but maybe you should find a creative activity that isn't so focused on a finished product. Writing and drawing are fine, but you seem to want fans of your writing or drawing more than you like sitting down to write or doodling on a piece of paper. You're so hamstrung by the fact that the second you type "THE END" that fans don't show up on your doorstep with flowers that the whole process makes you mad.

I suffer from a lot of the same problems when it comes to creative stuff, which is why I haven't written a substantial play in over 2 years. However, I can feel a sense of satisfaction when I'm in a play, which is why I've been auditioning on and off for a few shows, and may actually agree to participate in a (gulp!) musical.

I'm not saying taking up interpretive dance will satisfy you, but maybe there's some sort of creative methodone out in the world you haven't tried.

-- 13:12, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Thomas:

I do not think I agree with how Patrick sees the constant writing frustration, but I did bring it up in the mail I sent, absent minded as I am, always forgetting you are not into emails any more.

-- 13:38, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Columbina:

Sean: I understand the idea of not pricing too far above or below a perceived price point, lest people wonder why you're underpriced or think you overpriced. I'm not saying perception doesn't count. So perhaps I should change my statement to "$400 is too high a price point for a single piece of software, for my blood." I seem to have invisible ceilings for just about every commodity I buy, and for single-purchase software I can't imagine myself ever going higher than $200. Normally it'd be much lower.

Patrick: Far from disagreeing with you, I have reached more or less the same conclusion, but I haven't yet found a creative activity where the process is fascinating enough to me that I would be willing to do it just for the fun of doodling (as it were). I'm open to suggestions.

-- 15:55, 12 May 2010 (BST)

ProfRobert:

I take a slap in the face if that's the price of getting you and Nonelvis to come visit us in Brooklyn. (Note: Hot tub is finally up and running, so bring a bathing suit.)

-- 16:04, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Patrick:

I got one right! Will wonders never cease?

I think the only way to figure out a creative outlet you like for the sake of creating is to try a lot of stuff. I would also encourage you to find non-solitary creative outlets, because writing, drawing, world-building, etc., put you in a room all by yourself, which I don't think does you all that much good.

You're constantly seeking interaction without having to interact (online gaming, journaling, tweeting), but I think that's a bit of a pale comparison to actually being with other people. You're really interesting and fun in person (now that I had the opportunity to see you in person again), so maybe you should try things that involve other in-the-flesh people?

-- 16:45, 12 May 2010 (BST)

Joy:

Col, clearly you need to audition for a play or take up rock climbing! There, problem solved. (ducking)

Patrick, if you don't eventually write the farce based on your current workplace, I will cry, and I don't actually care much for plays.

-- 18:35, 13 May 2010 (BST)