Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [10-01-07 13:29]
>> In any event, from what you've told me, GIMP may not be the right tool
>> for me at this time.  I want to retain all my bits.  So until GIMP
>> natively supports 12-bits or higher, I'm gonna have to stick to
>> Photoshop for now.
> Then you need to abandon the jpeg format as it is lossey (google for
> it) and you need to shoot RAW.
True for all DSLR's (I think), but some better P&S's also can produce
TIFF's which uses a lossless compression (actually being pedantic) as
sort of pseudo raw format.

For me at least, the big reasons for PS CS over gimp are the following:
 - The plugins.  For the pro/semi pro shooter, there are  just way too
many very cool plugins for PS.  Everything from Noise-Ninja to lens
distortion corrections to some very interesting portrait tools to
virtual view camera adjustments (more than just perspective correction).
 - Integration with the color "spiders" and CMS
 - 8/24 vs 16/48 - This is at least on the horizon for GIMP

In GIMP's defense, many (if not the vast majority) of digital
photographers will have no need of these features.  Even if by some
magic they were available, few would use them because of the cost or
complexity.  It's a good tool.  I use it a great deal myself, and I
wouldn't hesitate to use it to teach an "into to digital darkroom"
course.  The exception would be, for students who were on a professional
photographer track.

Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to