On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, pixel fairy wrote:

>> The images I edit are usually around the 3500x2800
>> or so mark at 30 bits
>> depth.  I've recently tried Gimp on such images and
>> have found it to be
>> lacking to put it mildly.
> thats odd. that size should be fine. i work in film
> res all the time (4kx3k) at 32bpp (yes, i know film
> should be done at 48 or 64 bpp to prevent banding, i
> only work this res for testing)

Hmm, you can adjust contrast, colour curves and levels in more or less
realtime?  Can you tell me what hardware you have?  Also how do you get
32bpp images into gimp in the first place?
> look at your prefernces, whats your tile cache set to?

It was set to 8, or 10, or 15, I've tried them all, 8 seemed to be faster
as that stopped Gimp having to swap to VM or push other apps out to disc.
> your monitor is as real time as it gets. i wrote a
> little utility for gamma correction,
> http://frost.slimy.com/~pixel/tkgamma
> but it only works with certain X servers (hopefully
> later releases of XFree86-4 will fix the situation)

Cheers for that, I'll try it, I'm running XFree4 at the moment.  It seems
to get the DPI-rating right for my monitor which is a good start.
>> Please don't unhelpfully suggest as someone else in 
>> a newsgroup did, I break out emacs and start to code,
>> I'm no coder, I'm a photographer, and not very good
>> at that either ;-)
> c is not as difficult as it looks. if youve never programmed before
> and it scares you, try python, which you can script the gimp with.

It's not the language that's the problem, I've coded in C, perl and C++
but not very much (I've only ever written one X application), it's the
difficulty of getting my head around someone else's code and also working
with X and graphics, two areas I've not really dealt with.  As for Python,
I doubt that I could fix this hassle I'm having (if indeed it's not a
configuration problem) with python scripting.
> anyway, for what your doing, your better off with photoshop monitor
> calibration is better in windows and mac (way better in mac), and
> photoshop can deal with 16bit images, and a better set of color
> correction toys. the fact that photoshop uses LAB colors internally
> helps.

I am seriously considering this, one of the reasons I'm still using a PPro
200 with 64 megs is because it's fine for my usual linux needs, I don't
want to upgrade it for photo work until I know whether I want to use linux
or whether I jump to using a Mac with all the benefits that brings (on the
photo editing side).
> another alternative is to try http://film.gimp.org

Looks interesting, bodes well for the future.

> gimp 2 will support deeper color depths and have
> better support for converting between color spaces. i
> think well quickly have better color correction tools
> to with all that.

That sounds good.

Thanks for your help on this.

Reply via email to