Skip to main content

So apparently #Adobe is really worried now that "photoshopping" is becoming a generic term, which might lead them to lose the trademark. So they offer all sorts of helpful advice:


> Correct: The image was enhanced using Adobe® Photoshop® software.
> Incorrect: The image was photoshopped.

I think what we should do instead is say:

> The image was gimped using Adobe™ Photoshop™


Peter Wyrm reshared this.

The image was GNU image manipulated
image was manipulated using Gnu's Not Unix Image Manipulation Program, on a GNU/Linux system
I don't use Adobe Photoshop for photoshopping images though...
yes. That really kills the trademark. "I photoshopped it with Gimp" "I googled it with DDG"
Dear Adobe,
"enhanced" is no way a synonym of "photoshopped"

Enhanced is a positive subjective evaluation of a photoshopped image. The default evaluation of a photoshopped image using only the word "photoshopped" without qualification is nearly universally a negative connotation.

"The image was poorly edited with Adobe ®️ Photoshop ®️ " would be most correct.

Thank you,
They're worrying about that NOW? "To photoshop" has been a generic term for decades.
no need to add ableism, that won't make it better.

how about instead, fuck trademarks. people can use words how they want.

also, fuck Adobe completely. their "software rental" strategy effectively locks down artists' own works by making their data inaccessible without the proprietary program.
eh, it was a play on a certain popular FLOSS image manipulation program with an admittedly unfortunate name. I thought it would be obvious in the context. 🤷‍♀️
yes, i know that, but using the word to make fun of the people who use it, is still using the word, and makes you one of those people.
I'll keep that in mind next time.

That said, I did not use the word to make fun of people who use the GNU Image Manipulation Program. I used that term as a mirror-term to "photoshopping" — taking a name of a particular software package, and using it in a generic way. I use it myself, in fact, and I appreciate what it allows me to do.

I get what you're saying about the term, but ascribing particular intent to me here is unnecessary, and in this case incorrect.
it doesn't matter what your intent is, the impact is the same. if you care about disabled people (hi, that's me, i'm a disabled person), don't use ableist words.
Last I heard that was dead
Isn't that one of the main goals of Glimpse?
“My polaroid of a bandaid on a hoover didn’t have a kleenex in it, so I photoshopped one in.”
Let's call it gnump.
it’ll be like mastodon, stronger after every death. or is that highlanders
i would just go straight for Gump.
This just shows to me how Adobe doesn't get it. A company cannot change a language.
I agree on the "Adobe doesn't get it" part. Hard disagree on the other thing. Copanies change language all the time. "Piracy" was basically invented by the film and music companies.
Well okay that is fair enough. However what I meant was that a company cannot change language directly, because it is social thing. It's not about what maybe right logically. No different than how many say "can I have a Kleenex" instead of saying "can I have a facial tissue". Plus it's fare too late to stop "photoshopped" no different that stopping I'll "google it".
sure, that makes sense. 🙂
I think that ship sailed in the 1990s...
"The term 'photoshopping' is making Adobe lose its trademark! We released this image under a free license so you can help."
to most people Gimp only means that photo editing software. The more people know Gimp means that, the better. Lets not give a win to those few nasty ones using it for something else, and reserve the word exclusively for that.
I could settle for "this photo had been photo chopped" Same same but different.