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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |