On Thursday 27 March 2003 10:37 am, Kevin Myers wrote:
> There are some VERY misleading statements on the web page referenced
> below regarding the specific question originally posted by the
> potential GIMP user in this thread. That web page does say,
> incorrectly, that the GIMP only has one resolution, and that is 72
> dpi. That may have been true at some point in time, but that is most
> definitely NOT true in the version that I am using (1.2.4).
> First of all, that statement ONLY applies anyway when your monitor
> resolution is 72 dpi. My monitor resolution is 100 dpi (.25mm dot
> pitch, 1600x1200 on a 21" screen), which the GIMP supports directly,
> regardless of my next point.
> Secondly, there is a preferences item under Interface/Image Windows
> named Use "Dot for Dot" by default. With this option disabled (my
> normal usage), images at different resolutions than screen resolution
> will still be displayed at their normal size on the screen by
> Finally, you can specify both resolution and size in the standard
> File->New dialogue, as well as in the preferences options for new
> I'd also like to bring up one very important GIMP advantage that I
> didn't see mentioned at all in the Photoshop vs. GIMP comparison.
> The GIMP can in many cases handle LARGER images than Photoshop.
> Photoshop (ALL versions) is limited to 32K pixels in any single
> dimension, whereas the GIMP is only limited by available memory
> (potentially including virtual memory). I routinely process images
> with over .5G total pixels, and over 300K pixels on one axis using
> the GIMP. Photoshop cannot handle these images at all. In fact, I
> have found very few other applications that can.
> It would sure be nice if someone could make note of these facts on
> the subject web page.
Great idea Kevin! I don't know myself how old the site is and the data
contained therein, but it sounds like it could stand some updating. I
am sure everyone here appreciates you clearing up some older points
about Gimp that have been resolved in the newer versions. Gimp is a
good program and gets better with each new version. I don't know who
updates the mentioned site or who you would need to contact to make
note of the differences you point out, but I am sure it would be
worthwhile to do so.
I think someone on this list is putting together a revised FAQ as well
that will be somewhat more updated. I seem to remember someone putting
a call for questions and anyone that could answer those questions, so
maybe that person or persons could update us on the progress of that.
Thanks again for bringing all of us up to date on other ways Gimp proves
to be a better choice than Photoshop!
--- KMail v1.5 --- SuSE Linux Pro v8.1 ---
Registered Linux User #225206
On any other day, that might seem strange...
Gimp-user mailing list