If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
In article , Bob
wrote: [ ... ]. Regardless of the claims of GIMP evangelists/advocates it is not the equal of Photoshop CS6/CC, PSE, or lightroom. [ ... ] Of course Gimp isn't equal to Photoshop etc. There are lots of things Photoshop does that Gimp doesn't do. and the list keeps getting longer. There are however, things Gimp does that Photoshop doesn't. very, very few and nothing that's particularly common or all that useful. The vast bulk of things a person needs to do though can be done with either. as they can with iphoto, picasa, and zillions of other apps. most people don't need much. if your needs are simple then even the gimp is overkill. [ Oh, and BTW, many, if not most Gimp users have used Photoshop. bull****. for instance, our resident gimp zealot readily admits he has never used photoshop. So you may want to make up another 'fact' to explain why there are many, many happy and success Gimp users. ] nowhere near as many as photoshop users. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
In article , Bob
wrote: I came into this thread when you posed the question to nospam: "So then you are saying GIMP *can* be used efficiently with good results?" You might recall that my response was the following: "Not efficiently, using it is a royal PIA, and other software available for Windows and OSX is superior in all ways. However, some GIMP users who have no desire to use Win or OSX, and only think open source freeware have been able to produce acceptable images. I have a copy of GIMP 2.8.2 on this Mac which I visit from time to time to remind me just why I don't include it in my image processing workflow. Regardless of the claims of GIMP evangelists/advocates it is not the equal of Photoshop CS6/CC, PSE, or lightroom. There are also some other affordable and very powerful image editing apps available for OSX (I don't check on Win stuff) which put GIMP in the shade. So while GIMP might suffice for you, Floyd, and other single minded Linux users, it doesn't do it for me, and the great majority individuals in the graphics and digital imaging world. If I didn't use PS/CC and LR5, I would buy the $29.99 Pixelmator to use before I made GIMP part of my daily workflow." You never responded to that, and might never have seen it, but Floyd did. Actually I think I did respond to it, not that there's much to respond to. Use what you like. I have no problem with that. nothing wrong with that. just don't go saying the gimp is the equivalent of photoshop when it's clearly not. I came into this thread when I saw a number of people acting like they couldn't stand that someone might try Gimp -- also making elitist statements about how Gimp couldn't possibly be useful. Most have backed off those silly claims now, and we're now in the face-saving mode. if the tasks you want to do are difficult with one app or you experience problems and that same task can be done easily and without problems in another app, then why screw around with the former? switch to the app that does what you need without hassles. If you ever move off the Linux platform I suggest you take some of the other software offerings out for a test drive, you might be surprised how many have evolved over the last 20 years. I don't use Linux. Though I find it a sorry excuse for an OS, I use Windows every day. I have a paid-for-in-full copy of Photoshop and NIK software right here. They work. So does Gimp, and when I use Gimp, I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything. Lately though, I've been finding that I can do pretty much all I want with digikam, darktable, or my latest favorite, Rawtherapee. For Gimp/Photoshop-like local editing, I've been playing with Krita as an alternative for a while now. Would you like to make up more about me? nothing to make up about you. it's clear that your needs are simple. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
In article , Bob
wrote: Learning how to use Linux and GIMP might not be possible for some people, but it can be a superior choice for others. only for those not interested or incapable of using more capable software. had the original poster been using camera raw, he would not have had any problems with minolta/sony or any other raw file, and he would also benefit from a fully non-destructive workflow, something not possible with the gimp/ufraw. I'm confused. Are you saying *noone* can produce good and efficient results with GIMP, or are you saying *you* aren't able to use it effectively? neither. So then you are saying GIMP *can* be used efficiently with good results? definitely not. Hum, it looks like you keep changing your mind, or did you mean to say 'both' rather than 'neither'? i haven't changed my mind at all. using the gimp is less efficient. this is easily shown by the number of steps required and the time it takes to do the vast majority of tasks. not only is the gimp not at all efficient in what it does do, but it can't do a lot of things that other software has been doing for *years* and given its road map, it won't ever be doing. And? Isn't that true of all software? What about the things Gimp can do that no other software does as well? what might those be? If all software were exactly the same, why would we give them different names? BTW, with BABL and GEGL written, expect future Gimp to be a very different story. Even though they haven't been fully integrated into Gimp yet, I've found them to be quite elegant, useful and powerful. if they haven't been integrated then they don't count. Does it bother you that many of us can use Gimp and other non-Adobe software happily and productively, or that someone else might try it and like it? nope. what bothers me is when people say the gimp is a photoshop replacement when it's clearly not, or what floyd does, where he says those that don't use the gimp are too stupid to understand it. I don't own a $50,000 Hasselblad. Since that Hasselblad can very likely do things my cameras can't, should I stop using the ones I have? -- even though my cameras can do things the Hasselblad can't? Just wondering. straw man. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
In article , Bob
wrote: All that said, when you're serious about photography and raw you should seriously get away from Linux and The Gimp. Why would you write this? he wrote it because it's true. So you're both saying that it's not possibile to produce good photos using Linux and Gimp? nobody said that it's impossible. Good, because it sure looked like that's what you were saying. what is being said is that the gimp is inefficient, slow and clunky, with the alternatives leaving it in the dust. Meaning you'll produce, what, 10x as many photos of equal or better quality than anyone using Gimp? 100 times? What do you mean by 'leaving it in the dust'? or the same number of photos in 1/10 to 1/100th the time. that's what more efficient means. Does it bother you that someone else might use Gimp and be happy with it? nope. if someone likes making things more difficult than it needs to be, go for it. just don't fault others for pointing out that there are much easier and simpler ways to do things. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
In article , Bob
wrote: And so does that make those of us that don't have the problems with Gimp that you do dumber? what other apps have you used? because it sounds like you have never used anything other than the gimp and don't know just how awful it really is compared to what else is available. I've used quite a few, including Adobe products. Frankly I can't understand why you and others make such a big deal of it. Whether I use Photoshop or Gimp, it takes me about the same amount of time with about the same amount of ease for almost everything. then you aren't pushing either one very hard. For very special cases, any one of them might be superior for that particular problem, but since those are rare special cases, who cares if the tool you have at the time might take a bit longer. depends how often you do that particular task and how much work you want to expend doing it. if it's a one time thing then it won't matter much. on the other hand, if you expect to be doing that task a lot then it's worth finding a better tool. it will pay off in the long run. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
Floyd: Thanks again for all of the very helpful information. I'll keep working with UFRaw until I master its capabilities! Regards, -- Jeff |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
Neil Ellwood writes:
Have you tried Raw Studio or Raw Therapee ? No I haven't. I see both in the software repository and I'll take a look at each of them. Thanks Neil! Regards, -- Jeff |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
Tony Cooper writes:
It seems that only Floyd has kept the original poster's question in mind. The poster didn't ask what OS or what software would be an improvement on what he has. He asked what can be done to work with what he has. Floyd - presumably - did a good job in answering this. I say "presumably" because I use neither Linux nor Gimp and don't know how practical Floyd's response was. It's too bad that questions like the original poster's get diverted into battles over OS and software with the same old points being rehashed over-and-over. Nothing new was brought up. You'd think some people have just discovered that Photoshop is a good program and feel compelled to tell the world about it. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando FL Thanks Tony. Spot on. Floyd has been extremely helpful. And I certainly didn't wish to start a flame war about either the OS or the software. I was only interested in seeing if other Sony/Minolta users were experiencing the same results as I, so that I could isolate the problem to either the software or to my use of it. Regards, -- Jeff |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
Alan Browne writes:
On 2014.04.06, 11:10 , Tony Cooper wrote: It seems that only Floyd has kept the original poster's question in mind. The poster didn't ask what OS or what software would be an improvement on what he has. He asked what can be done to work with what he has. Floyd - presumably - did a good job in answering this. I say "presumably" because I use neither Linux nor Gimp and don't know how practical Floyd's response was. It's too bad that questions like the original poster's get diverted into battles over OS and software with the same old points being rehashed over-and-over. Nothing new was brought up. I replied to the OP and I pointed out that the UFRaw settings that were displayed looked a bit off to me, and one in particular (WB) was suspicious. I told the OP to make some adjustments to get (closer) to a baseline position. Since I no longer have the Gimp (or Linux) installed, I didn't take it further to test the settings that he had. He did not reply to that - so I wonder: 1) Were we trolled? (Again). 2) Who's the troll? (And I have my suspicions). No trolling here. Using helpful pointers from others, I have been working with adjustments to UFRaw and have gotten closer to a reasonable picture, while at the same time discovering that the software build I am using may have some problems compared to a later release. Alan, if I didn't reply directly to your post, it may be that it got missed in all the noise! Sorry about that. I do try to follow up to, or acknowledge the help of others. I've been away today and only just started to go through the many posts to this group. Regards, -- Jeff |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Any Minolta/Sony users using UFRaw and GIMP?
On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 04:38:45 +0000, Jeffery Small wrote:
Neil Ellwood writes: Have you tried Raw Studio or Raw Therapee ? No I haven't. I see both in the software repository and I'll take a look at each of them. Thanks Neil! Regards, As I understand it, most all the open source software is based on dcraw - so they're going to have similar capabilities with different interfaces and some extensions. In the past, I've found dcraw useful to get a quick look at things by extracting the jpeg thumbnail (dcraw -e). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A sad time for Sony/Minolta DSLR users | Chris Malcolm[_2_] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | June 3rd 12 10:41 AM |
A sad time for Sony/Minolta DSLR users | Joe Kotroczo | Digital Photography | 0 | May 31st 12 08:14 PM |
A sad time for Sony/Minolta DSLR users | Joe Kotroczo | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | May 31st 12 08:14 PM |
GIMP and UFraw | jeff worsnop | Digital Photography | 8 | December 8th 08 04:23 AM |