Any GIMP users (Linux)

Dan wrote:

Stacey wrote:
joe mama wrote:

hi,

i am muther-f'ing sick of windows, bill gates, and redmond, wa. as well.
i want to migrate over to linux, but need to know if the gimp is even
close to PS CS2 in quality.

Nope. No color management at all. No monitor calibration support, no
printer profiles etc. I use linux for general purpose computing (have
been for almost 10 years) but have a win2K box just for photography
stuff. I wish linux had better support for this type stuff but it just
doesn't. Unless you are willing to sacrifice quality to say you are
windows free, you can't use it for this IMHO.


I agree that Gimp has limitations. I try to use it sometimes but always
go back to PS because i'm so familiar with interface. There is a
GimpShop which is an addon that makes Gimp look like PS. At the end of
the day its free. Linux has improved drastically on desktop in the past
couple of years and the new crop of distributions releases is promising
more functionality in userfriendliness area.

I'm a huge linux fan and use it for my daily work, it's just it a losing
battle trying to use it for higher end graphics work unless you have a
custom software system specific to linux? I'm sure they may exist somewhere
(dream works etc) but not for us mere mortals.

--

Stacey

RW+/- wrote:

On Wed, 10 May 2006 03:23:11 -0400, Stacey wrote:

joe mama wrote:

hi,

i am muther-f'ing sick of windows, bill gates, and redmond, wa. as well.
i want to migrate over to linux, but need to know if the gimp is even
close to PS CS2 in quality.

Nope. No color management at all. No monitor calibration support, no
printer profiles etc. I use linux for general purpose computing (have
been for almost 10 years) but have a win2K box just for photography
stuff. I wish linux had better support for this type stuff but it just
doesn't. Unless you are willing to sacrifice quality to say you are
windows free, you can't use it for this IMHO.

You should upgrade to XP, for many reasons, all related to graphics.

Funny you say that, that's what I'm doing tonight!

I waited for SP2 and all/most of the bugs to get worked out which most seem
to be..
--

Stacey

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

Måns Rullgård writes:

David Dyer-Bennet writes:

"joe mama" writes:

i am muther-f'ing sick of windows, bill gates, and redmond, wa. as
well. i want to migrate over to linux, but need to know if the gimp
is even close to PS CS2 in quality. my main concern is being able
to use layers via PS, and curves. I don't use too many filters, and
the soft focus, Gausiann blur ones seem to be inthe gimp.

I used it seriously for the first time last week while on a work trip
(work laptop runs Linux). For my taste it lacks key features,
including bicubic interpolation (or even better, any of the more
advanced methods),

The Gimp does have bicubic scaling. Where did you look for it?

Good. It's not listed in the list of interpolation methods in the
drop-down on the dialog box for image rescaling, though.


Yes it is. The choises are "None" (i.e, nearest neighbor) , "Linear" (i.e.,
bilinear), "Cubic" (i.e., bicubic). What version are you running?

--
Jani Huhtanen
Tampere University of Technology, Pori

David J. Littleboy wrote:


"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote:
RW+/- writes:
On 10 May 2006 13:10:27 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

Linux supports high-end computers better than windows, in general.
It's the latest high-end gaming graphics cards that might be issues.
As for updates/upgrades and security -- far better than windows.

Sorry, that statement is blatantly false. As to security it only appears
to
be the case since the main focus of haxors are to breech windows system,
and then it is usually the case only because the users, or IT people are
just too lazy to keep their systems up to date.

No, the linux security model is simply much better than the Windows
one.

Well, it's better than the Windows 95/98/SE/ME model. It's no better than
the NT model.

Sure it is. Also doesn't allow just any ol file with a .exe to be run by
clicking on it..



The vast majority of complex applications, if they contain an
exploitable bug, only give the attacker access to one user's files,
and don't give any ability to compromise system software or do weird
things.

Windows NT/XP will support that just fine. The problem is that most 'Doze
users run in an administrator mode so they don't have to re-login to
install software.

Active X can do this irregardless of what you are running under. And what
about the worms that went after dcom? you didn't even have to touch
ANYTHING for the system to be infected, just turned on and connected to a
network.

Also, since there's only one user on my system, it's
just as big a deal to trash all the user files as it is to trash the
system files.

Users can't even see system files on a -nix box.



--

Stacey

On Wed, 10 May 2006 15:18:05 GMT
"joe mama" wrote:


"Derek Fountain" wrote in message
reenews.net...

However, if you're doing web work and only using sRGB you can run
Photoshop under Wine - it's now a supported application on the
Codeweavers list. Codeweavers Wine is a remarkably complete program
these days. I've used it every day for a year and I've never seen
it so much as hiccup.

I may have to try PS under WINE.

Recent versions of Photoshop weren't supported at all under WINE
the last time I looked. If someone wants to buy Codeweavers a
license so they can extend WINE to get it to work, that would be
cool.

I downloaded GIMP last night, but
haven't had any time to really try it out yet. It definitely looks
different than PS, but also seems to have many of the same functions.

That's about right. Many of the same functions, packaged a little
differently. A few functions just not there.

One thing that was different is no thumbnail (that I can find)
viewing of directories in its directory tree. Maybe I just haven't
figured that one out yet.

Nope, you've got it right. The GIMP is an image editor, not an
image management solution.

Paul Allen

On 10 May 2006 15:50:15 -0400
Bruce Lewis wrote:

Paul Allen writes:

Your laughter is hollow. Linux uses standard protocols
and does not have problems any particular ISP's wires.
There are some ISP's who are clueless about Linux, however.
Earthlink is one. Comcast is another. If you're the sort
that calls the ISP for support a lot, it might make sense
to shop around for a better one.

To be clear, if you aren't one who calls the ISP a lot, Comcast is no
problem.

I never need to call Comcast. But when they shut off their
DNS servers and send you multiple content-free emails about
how you have to use "dynamic DNS" in order to avoid trouble
with their DNS servers, I call that a problem. I'm not
sure they're technically competent. With that said, their
service is really fast and mostly reliable.

If you're connecting a wireless hub to your cable modem,
they won't demand that you stick their Windows-only CD into it
somewhere, they'll just turn on your access from their end.

When they came out to hook us up, I used my Linux laptop to
connect to the cable modem to configure the account. When
their web server didn't respond the guy said, "We don't support
Linux," and left. Packed up his tools, got in his truck, and
drove away, without even wishing me good luck.

Linux
then works fine.

After they fixed their server problem, I was able to configure
the account, move the Linksys router into place, clone the
ethernet address, etc. Linux worked fine, no thanks to
Comcast.

I have Comcast at home and it works great for Linux and OSX.

I have mostly the same experience here, although if I were
the sort that needed technical support I'd be looking elsewhere.

Paul Allen

New users should use Suse, even with its drawbacks.

Never tried that; too expensive for my taste.

You can't afford free?

No, the linux security model is simply much better than the Windows
one.

Well, it's better than the Windows 95/98/SE/ME model. It's no better than
the NT model.

Yes it is. Way, way better. You need to understand the details.
Microsoft didn't even get the basics right, like adding salt to password
hashes to thwart rainbow table attacks, or including a firewall that
defaults on. Word is that the firewall in Vista, when it arrives, will
default to allowing all outbound traffic - that's laughable, especially
if you're a worm writer.

Windows NT/XP will support that just fine. The problem is that most 'Doze
users run in an administrator mode so they don't have to re-login to install
software.

Or install printer drivers. Or change the system time. Or add security
patches. Or do just about any other admin task.

Also, since there's only one user on my system, it's just as big a
deal to trash all the user files as it is to trash the system files.

There's only one (non admin) user on this Linux box, and nothing I do as
that user will infect my system files with worms or other malware.
Trashing system files is a huge deal - if I, or something unpleasant,
deletes all my user files I can restore them from backup in a few
minutes. Trash all the system files and you're looking at hours of work
reinstalling the OS and the applications.

A system that doesn't, in all practicality, *enforce* an isolation
between user and administrator is broken by design. Vista should finally
include this, but reports are they are having trouble retro-fitting it
to a product that has never had it.

Sheesh, buffer
overrun attacks still work in some corners of the Unix context. What a joke.

Buffer overruns affect Unix, Linux, Windows, Mac, and every other stack
based architecture. Pointing this particular finger only at Unix is
disingenuous.

Jani Huhtanen writes:

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

Måns Rullgård writes:

David Dyer-Bennet writes:

"joe mama" writes:

i am muther-f'ing sick of windows, bill gates, and redmond, wa. as
well. i want to migrate over to linux, but need to know if the gimp
is even close to PS CS2 in quality. my main concern is being able
to use layers via PS, and curves. I don't use too many filters, and
the soft focus, Gausiann blur ones seem to be inthe gimp.

I used it seriously for the first time last week while on a work trip
(work laptop runs Linux). For my taste it lacks key features,
including bicubic interpolation (or even better, any of the more
advanced methods),

The Gimp does have bicubic scaling. Where did you look for it?

Good. It's not listed in the list of interpolation methods in the
drop-down on the dialog box for image rescaling, though.


Yes it is. The choises are "None" (i.e, nearest neighbor) , "Linear" (i.e.,
bilinear), "Cubic" (i.e., bicubic). What version are you running?

Ah. I'm a mathematician; to me "cubic" couldn't possibly have meant
the same thing as "bicubic".
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

Jani Huhtanen wrote:

Yes it is. The choises are "None" (i.e, nearest neighbor) , "Linear" (i.e.,
bilinear), "Cubic" (i.e., bicubic). What version are you running?

GIMP has better blurring facilities than Photoshop, however.
This is because it has a Repeat option.

To blur blue-sky grain in film scans, I use the regular blur
(instead of Gaussian blur, which is too strong), reduce selection
by one pixel, blur twice, reduce selection again, blur thrice, etc.

Results are much better than anything I can do in Photoshop.