A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

GIMP



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old September 2nd 08, 11:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!


I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.


The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.

No thanks.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
  #62  
Old September 2nd 08, 11:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 796
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Alan Browne wrote:
Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!


I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that
box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.


The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.

No thanks.

For photography, both are similarly clunky, non-intuitive, and bloatware.
For image manipulation (as opposed to photography) YMMV.
  #63  
Old September 2nd 08, 11:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Alan Browne wrote:
Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!

I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I
doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.


The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.


If you don't take enough time to learn how to use it,
what point is there in claiming it is "clunky"?

*You* are clunky, not GIMP.

No thanks.


That is a good point when properly applied. Here it should be
applied to you, and your advice.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #64  
Old September 3rd 08, 12:26 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Blinky the Shark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 827
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!


I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.


The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.


The point shown *here* (above) is that you don't know how to use it.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

  #65  
Old September 3rd 08, 01:46 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default GIMP is free but it is no bargain.

David J Taylor wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
[]
See above. There is no mystery to gimp. It has a clunky user
interface and works at 8 b/c v. 16 b/c for even the "amateur" version
of PS. A basic function like USM produces mediocre results v.
photoshop.
To its credit, Gimp reads both DNG and camera raw files quite well, so
it is trying to keep up; but again, the editable in-memory Gimp data
is 8 b/c, not 16 ( 1/256 v 1/65536).


Alan, Floyd,

Could you clarify something for me please?

When you talk about 8-bit editing, you are presumably talking about
editing something like an 8-bit JPEG file, one where the gamma is
approximately 2.2.

When you talk about 16-bit editing, are you dealing with linear data, or
with gamma-corrected data?


AFAIK Tiff files have an assumed gamma when editing ro being displayed
or printed.

You might come across a TIFF file that was stored linearily for example
and it will look really dark. Apply a gamma value to it (through an
editor or converter) and then store it after conversion. I don't know
if TIFF has a tag to store the gamma value.

What I'm on about with this 8 v 16 bit business however is how finely
stored the data is and hence how badly it is mangled in the lower bits
when represented as an 8 bit number (regardless of an exponential used
for visual representation).

The point is that 16 b/c contains data at a finer degree of granularity
which is what is needed during a chain of editing operations to reduce
artifacts created by the editing itself, operation after operation which
in photoshop can be as few as a 2 or 3 operations to dozens depending on
the whims of the photoshop user.

The in-memory representation of an image is up to the s/w designer. I
would hope that it is designed to lose as little dynamic resolution
through successive operations as possible. And in all cases, the higher
the resolution, the better for the data before final output.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
  #66  
Old September 3rd 08, 02:00 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Me wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!

I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag
that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.


The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.

No thanks.

For photography, both are similarly clunky, non-intuitive, and bloatware.
For image manipulation (as opposed to photography) YMMV.


Elements? Yes. Very bloaty. CS3? No, quite lean and direct. Yes it
has a lot more features than I would use, but they're not in my way.

The main reason I got CS3 was for better control of printing. As you
can adjust based on the CYMK output. This is not available in Elements.
Skin tones in particular are quirky to get right using RGB. Using the
resultant yellow and magenta gets you to a desired balance very quickly.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
  #67  
Old September 3rd 08, 02:08 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!
I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.

The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.


The point shown *here* (above) is that you don't know how to use it.


While I don't feel like going through that old nugget of human factors
engineering: counting steps, mouse clicks and changes of user operating
contexts to come up with the number of steps for each of photoshop and
gimp for a given operation or a salad bowl of operations, it is clear to
me every time I use gimp that it takes more mouse moves, more keystrokes
and more clicks to do a selection of common tasks.

I never said Gimp couldn't do things or that I couldn't do them; I just
said (short version ahead) it sucks in gimp compared to photoshop.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
  #68  
Old September 3rd 08, 02:20 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!
I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.

The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.


The point shown *here* (above) is that you don't know how to use it.


Ah. Now I get it. You're Linux based and there is no Photoshop that
runs native.

Adobe, for reasons peculiar to themselves, have not released a Linux v.
of photoshop. Probably because there are precious few people in
photography, graphics, advertising, web design, etc. who are Linux based.

The closest *nix v. is for Mac OS X. Which I have. Adobe kindly and
without charge transferred my license from WinXP to Mac.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
  #69  
Old September 3rd 08, 02:45 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Blinky the Shark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 827
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!
I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.
The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.


The point shown *here* (above) is that you don't know how to use it.


While I don't feel like going through that old nugget of human factors
engineering: counting steps, mouse clicks and changes of user operating
contexts to come up with the number of steps for each of photoshop and
gimp for a given operation or a salad bowl of operations, it is clear to
me every time I use gimp that it takes more mouse moves, more keystrokes
and more clicks to do a selection of common tasks.


In the example above, it takes one click to do something you described as
taking several. That doesn't add a lot of credibility to your
comparisons.

I never said Gimp couldn't do things or that I couldn't do them; I just
said (short version ahead) it sucks in gimp compared to photoshop.


The problem is with neither interface. The problem is expecting all
applications to work the same, and not taking the time to learn #2 that
has devoted to learning #1. PS would - given a lack of desire to actually
learn it - seem as wrong to non-PS user as a large non-PS image
manipulation program would seem to you.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

  #70  
Old September 3rd 08, 02:49 AM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Blinky the Shark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 827
Default GIMP ... yes, it sucks

Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

Blinky the Shark wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

The USM is ________HORRIBLE________
a) The preview is on a tiny area of the scene and you have to move
sliders around to select an area (imagine a 8500 x 8500 pixel image and
preview area of approx 200x200 and you want to check for detail and
halos at a dozen places... Oh my... crap!
I don't have the latest version of The GIMP, but I doubt that it's lost
this featu Down near the bottom-right corner, there's a
four-directional arrow icon (like a + with each arm having an
outward-pointing arrowhead). Click-and-hold on that, and a thumbnail
appears there, with a box that represents your viewing area; drag that box
around the thumbnail and the image moves correspondingly within your
viewport, in real time.
The point, really, is that compared to PS, it is clunky to use.


The point shown *here* (above) is that you don't know how to use it.


Ah. Now I get it. You're Linux based and there is no Photoshop that
runs native.


I also run Windows XP. And, of course, I use The GIMP there, as well. I
have no more need for PS than you have for The GIMP. Since I bothered to
learn The GIMP. I used PaintShopPro with Windows for years, before I
started using The GIMP (which does not have the same interface as PSP,
either, of course, so I simply learned the new (GIMP) interface). I'm
lucky to be young enough to learn new things, being only 61.

Adobe, for reasons peculiar to themselves, have not released a Linux v.
of photoshop. Probably because there are precious few people in
photography, graphics, advertising, web design, etc. who are Linux
based.


That's common reasoning.

The closest *nix v. is for Mac OS X. Which I have. Adobe kindly and
without charge transferred my license from WinXP to Mac.


Why shouldn't they? Do they really earn extra points for that? Serious
question.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gimp (was Which Software) Jerry Digital Photography 2 December 24th 06 01:51 AM
The GIMP on the go - in your PDA! Mike Henley Digital Photography 2 October 30th 05 08:20 AM
Do I want The Gimp??? royroy Digital Photography 52 August 6th 04 04:44 AM
The Gimp Allodoxaphobia Digital Photography 14 July 10th 04 06:59 AM
help with the GIMP Peter Medium Format Photography Equipment 5 April 13th 04 12:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.