Quoting Sascha Beaumont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Chris Wilkinson wrote:
> > A few things. Photoshop might also be seen to be missing a few
> > things too.
> >
> > The biggest thing missing about Gimp is a well researched and
> objective
> > review, as opposed to subjective spin from people who have spent a
> mere
> > fraction of the time a digital artist would need to spend to acquaint
> > themselves with either software...
>
> <rant>
>
> Gimp's true strengths show when you look at it as a tool for an artist,
> not a tool for a photo editor.
It's pretty good as a photo-editor too.
to wit, before:-
http://berty.dyndns.org/Sawtell_Family.orig.jpg
and after:-
http://berty.dyndns.org/Sawtell_Family.jpg
Fifty year old black and white photos of genealogical interest only, but they
do give an indication of what is possible with gimp.
> I disagree with the first sentence in the gimp/photoshop review posted
> about them both being photo manipulation programs. Gimp is an *image*
> manipulation program, and could/can be used for some photo
> manipulation.
>
> The reviewer in the article mentions his Photoshop skills were gained
> in magazine work, GIMP doesn't even support CMYK - a prerequisite for
> print work. Its almost like the difference between oil and water paints,
> they both have their advantages and disadvantages - but you can still create
> a simalar picture from either.
CMYK is coming.
> I can and I do use both programs, I'm more proficient with photoshop
> but I'm amazed at some of the things I've created with gimp that I could
> probably never have imagined in photoshop.
>
> </rant>
>
> My point is they can't be objectively compared, they are *so* different
> that as soon as you get past the surface you see that you're not
> comparing fruit, you're comparing apples and oranges. Not two types of
> apple.
All absolutely true. The main problem the gimp has is that the pig ignorant
reviewers simply don't know what they are talking about and cannot be bothered
to find out. For a few examples of what's possible with the gimp see:-
ftp://ftp2.jetstreamgames.co.nz/gentoo/distfiles/GimpUsersManual_SecondEdition-HTML_Search.tar.gz
and for the coloured illustrations:-
ftp://ftp2.jetstreamgames.co.nz/gentoo/distfiles/GimpUsersManual_SecondEdition-HTML_Color.tar.gz
Take care, 21 and 4 megs respectively.
For more pretty good doco see the online help and particularly:-
http://gimp-savvy.com/
There is also a copy of the book 'Grokking the Gimp' in the public library.
It's for gimp-1.3, so it's a bit dated now, but still very useful.
As I see it the main disadvantage of the gimp, as compared to PhotoShop, is
that most of it's functions and plugins are written in an interpretive
language, thus it's very slow when being used with images of print quality
size. The other main disadvantage is that the colour depth is only 8 bits per
channel. This limitation is rectified in the FilmGimp fork of the project.
http://cinepaint.sourceforge.net/
Widely used in the Industry.
--
Sincerely etc.
Christopher Sawtell
--
Sincerely etc.,
Christopher Sawtell
