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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:10:45 -0800, measekite wrote:
H.S. wrote: wrote: Hello, Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is cheap(er)? Thanks, Oaf Give GIMP a try, you will be pleasantly surprised. It is free and open source. http://gimp.org/ -HS I use it. I like it. I only recommend it to very few people. Here is why. It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer. I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. The new versions do not come out frequently so it will be some time before it begins to catch up. There are very few books on it and the help system has no features. In HELP there is not search function, no bookmarks and no way to change the print size. It is very rudimentary. The online tutorial "Grokking the GIMP" seems to cover most of the bases, though I'm not sure it's been updated for the latest version. I've also found several good books on using GIMP. With all of that going against it the price (free) is right and it will do the basic stuff. Once you bite the bullet and read the PDF manual and spend a lot of time playing with it I think it is very good for photo editing and it is my choice. I am hoping it just gets better. Out of curiosity, are you using the latest release? I understand it has changed somewhat. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
On 16 Feb 2008 23:23:04 GMT, ray wrote in
: On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:10:45 -0800, measekite wrote: It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer. I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing. -- Best regards, John Navas Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
In article , John Navas
wrote: I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease. photoshop's interface is the result of years of input from actual users, from graphic designers to photographers to prepress users. the interface works and it works well. gimp's ui is whatever a bunch of programmers thought up, and it shows. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing. very much so, and gimp lacks one of the most useful form of layers, adjustment layers. that alone is a very serious omission. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
In article
, " wrote: Hello, Just wondered which image software people use to process their digital photos. I know about Photoshop but can't afford it - is there a cheaper alternative which does a more limited set of functions and is cheap(er)? Thanks, Oaf It depends on which computer OS you use, but Photoshop Elements is popular with Windows and Mac OS X users. It does most of what regular Photoshop does, but at a fraction of the price. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
On Feb 18, 9:52 am, nospam wrote:
In article , John Navas wrote: I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease. photoshop's interface is the result of years of input from actual users, from graphic designers to photographers to prepress users. the interface works and it works well. gimp's ui is whatever a bunch of programmers thought up, and it shows. What shows very clearly in the GIMP is that it was written by people used to window managers that are slightly more sophisticated than Windows (it's fine if you disagree with the last clause, just ignore my post and let's not get into arguments). I don't use it (GIMP, that is), but have tried it on windows and it's almost unusable. Under Linux with KDE, though, it all makes perfect sense. But I don't expect anybody to agree, of course! (in a group where things like DOF can be argued ad nauseum without reaching a conclusion, arguing the merits of operating systems vs toys is probably going to be an exercise in frustration). Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing. very much so, and gimp lacks one of the most useful form of layers, adjustment layers. that alone is a very serious omission. That is indeed a serious omission. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
On Feb 18, 2:06 pm, acl wrote:
clause, what am I writing! I mean part... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
nospam wrote: In article , John Navas wrote: I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease. photoshop's interface is the result of years of input from actual users, from graphic designers to photographers to prepress users. the interface works and it works well. gimp's ui is whatever a bunch of programmers thought up, and it shows. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing. very much so, and gimp lacks one of the most useful form of layers, adjustment layers. that alone is a very serious omission. It also lacks the ability to open a saved file and edit the layers. Hopefully these features will be added. For the difference in price and more if you upgrade all of the time you can purchase a compelte DSLR system. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 05:06:56 -0800, acl wrote:
On Feb 18, 9:52 am, nospam wrote: In article , John Navas wrote: I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease. photoshop's interface is the result of years of input from actual users, from graphic designers to photographers to prepress users. the interface works and it works well. gimp's ui is whatever a bunch of programmers thought up, and it shows. What shows very clearly in the GIMP is that it was written by people used to window managers that are slightly more sophisticated than Windows (it's fine if you disagree with the last clause, just ignore my post and let's not get into arguments). I don't use it (GIMP, that is), but have tried it on windows and it's almost unusable. Under Linux with KDE, though, it all makes perfect sense. But I don't expect anybody to agree, of course! (in a group where things like DOF can be argued ad nauseum without reaching a conclusion, arguing the merits of operating systems vs toys is probably going to be an exercise in frustration). That could explain my different perspective. I eschew MS - use Linux almost exclusively, and GIMP seems quite intuitive to me - moreso that PS. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing. very much so, and gimp lacks one of the most useful form of layers, adjustment layers. that alone is a very serious omission. That is indeed a serious omission. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Image software
John Navas wrote:
On 16 Feb 2008 23:23:04 GMT, ray wrote in : On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:10:45 -0800, measekite wrote: It is not too user friendly. It is a diamond in the rough. It does not have a good built in browser organizer. I does not seem to follow standard windows (not MS Windows but windows ) conventions. It is difficult to use. In Linux the printer dialogs are sort of convoluted and you really need to spend time and money (print photo testing) to know what you are doing. The crop tools and layers are no where as good as Photoshop since you cannot go back and edit a layer. I've not used photoshop much, but I find GIMP to be more intuitive to use - it simply seems to me to be easier to figure out, at least for basic operations, which is what the OP seemed to be indicating he was interested in. My own take is the GIMP interface is much more painful to use than Photoshop, itself no paragon of ease. Hello, John: Damned straight! GIMP is limp, from my personal experience. I much prefer Paint Shop Pro, which I've been using for the past 10+ years or so; I'm on version 7, at the moment. Similarly, folks doing basic editing are probably not going to be overly concerned about playing with layers. Layers are extremely useful, even for basic editing. Never figured out, what the hell "layers" are for, in PSP. That's just me, being somewhat of a dabbler in these matters, though. g Cordially, John Turco |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Image re-size software | Brian[_4_] | Digital Photography | 7 | February 6th 08 05:55 PM |
image managing software | Lammi | Digital Photography | 2 | November 15th 07 08:54 PM |
Best software for image enhancement? | SS | Digital Photography | 2 | June 9th 07 12:55 AM |
Image enlargement software | Alfred Molon | Digital Photography | 9 | November 22nd 06 04:49 AM |
Image Processing Software | Gary G | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 1 | January 14th 04 04:05 AM |