?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Ah... - I know it's wonky and I don't care [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Kake

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Randomness Guide to London | Open Guide to Cambridge | Snake Soup | KakeFlickr ]

Ah... [Sep. 24th, 2007|06:12 pm]
Kake
[Tags|, , ]

I realise that my previous post had a very important omission, and so I include it here. (This post will make no sense unless you read the previous post.)

Incidentally, I will not hate you if you choose the second option. I really want to know.

Hello Kake!

Yes, GIMP is magic!
21(37.5%)
This is not interesting; why are you showing me this?
2(3.6%)
Ticky.
13(23.2%)
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: ceb
2007-09-24 05:15 pm (UTC)
[x] wish I knew how to drive it properly ;-)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-24 05:17 pm (UTC)
Heh. I'm still learning how to drive it properly too! Make sure you have version 2.x rather than 1.x; it's much easier to use and has more features.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ewx
2007-09-24 05:30 pm (UTC)

If you know the keywords to type into Google there are plenty of recipes for some effect or other online. These aren't useful only in their own right but also for familiarizing you with the tools, even if you don't care about the effect in question.

Older versions came with a handy cheat sheet documenting what all the modifier keys did. Not by any means a complete tutorial but I found it just enough that the whole thing went from "how on earth do I drive this?" to "that looks interesting, I wonder what it does?"

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-24 05:48 pm (UTC)
Hm, yes — learning the vocabulary is half the struggle. Who would have imagined that "unsharp mask" is something that you use to sharpen?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ewx
2007-09-24 06:01 pm (UTC)
That one's not Gimp's fault, as it turns out. [[Unsharp mask]] explains the bonkers name.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: natf
2007-09-25 11:23 pm (UTC)
It masks the unsharp stuff? ;-p

Just my guess at the semantics...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: diffrentcolours
2007-09-24 11:55 pm (UTC)
I spent an interesting afternoon with a friend of mine who's a professional graphic artist - I can drive the GIMP but don't know what to do, he knew what to do but not how to drive the GIMP. With him sitting there saying stuff like "I need to reduce the blue highlights in that area of the picture", and me knowing which menu options to look for, we achieved some good stuff.

I think I convinced him that it was worth overcoming his ignorance of GIMP's interface to get to the power beneath.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:08 am (UTC)
That sounds very interesting. I've been wondering for a while if it's worth getting together a group of people with different but complementary skills to see if they can teach each other/interest each other in various techniques.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: imc
2007-09-24 05:45 pm (UTC)
GIMP is also like your brain — you* only ever use 10% of it (or in my case 1% because I don't understand what I'm doing, although I did learn about layers earlier this month).

*generic "you"
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-24 05:47 pm (UTC)
Layers are brilliant. Layers! Layer masks!

I used a couple of layers in the photo above; one to lighten the top half of the photo and the other to improve the contrast in the bottom half.

I love layers!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ewx
2007-09-24 06:35 pm (UTC)
I find them quite handy as a form of version control, as well as (and in conjunction with) all the things they're actually supposed to be good for. This and this share a single .xcf file, for instance.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:00 am (UTC)
How do you use them as version control, then? I looked at the images but can't work out how they relate.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ewx
2007-09-25 10:51 am (UTC)
The background is one layer, and then there's a layer (or two) for each of the different captions. The JPEGs are made by disabling the layer(s) I don't want and saving.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-26 03:57 pm (UTC)
Ah-ha, I see, thanks!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: glassstrider
2007-09-24 05:50 pm (UTC)
It's the graphics editor that is installed on my work computer.

I honestly can't say that I really like using it, but then again I am more used to Paint Shop Pro and don't really know very much about using GIMP, so if I ever learnt more that might change.

It did come in very, very handy for the time I had to "adjust" some time sheets, though, which came out very well indeed.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:00 am (UTC)
Forgery!

I've never used Paintshop, so I don't really know how they compare. I was basically squeeing about photo manipulation tools in general :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: therealdrhyde
2007-09-25 10:51 am (UTC)
I used to think Paint Shop Pro was pretty good, but it's Windows only and I've not used it for years and have no idea what it's like now. These days I use Photoshop Elements for my photos, and there's very few things I use in it that weren't in PSP. I liked PSP and Photoshop Elements enough that I actually paid for them.

Just about the only photo I've edited that I would have had difficulty with in PSP is this one, which started off like this.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-26 03:58 pm (UTC)
Apparently I don't have permission to view the second link :(
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: therealdrhyde
2007-09-26 05:20 pm (UTC)
Erk. That'll be my magic anti-hotlinking thing. Cut n paste the URL into a new browser window and it should work. You might have to do a force-refresh (shift and click on the refresh button) if your browser cached the failure.

[geeky bit: you have to request the image without a Referer header]
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-28 02:07 pm (UTC)
Ah-ha, I should have thought of that. Happens quite a bit on livejournal. Anyway - nice work!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thekumquat
2007-09-24 06:36 pm (UTC)
GIMP is free and works on PCs - is that right? I ought to download it at some point.
Is it similar to Photoshop to use?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: babysimon
2007-09-24 07:05 pm (UTC)
It's similar conceptually.

It's not that similar if you're a heavy Photoshop user. I've seen graphic designers being very rude about the GIMP because the accelerators and modifiers are different. But then they were not the brightest.

To be fair it does lack a couple of things, CMYK mainly. But I don't need that, and I'd rather learn something free...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: thekumquat
2007-09-25 09:36 am (UTC)
I haven't used Photoshop since I left Mill Hill. Actually, since my computer at home I'd installed it on died...
Basically I'm familiar with layers and basic modification and things like dpi (I used to mainly have to play with 4 pics and then make the good bits the same size and make a montage of them and add captions. Not much else).
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: babysimon
2007-09-25 09:37 am (UTC)
Yeah, I'd learn GIMP then...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:01 am (UTC)
I've never used Photoshop, so I'm not sure how it compares. The earlier versions of GIMP were quite user-unfriendly, but I think the more recent ones are easier to use — this might be because I'm more used to it now, though.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: rik
2007-09-24 07:00 pm (UTC)
Before:
m12-m1

After:
m12-m1-paintjob


Yes. I do love GIMP/Photoshop. For my photos though, I'm mostly using Picasa these days - I don't believe in Photoshopping photos just to make it better - it's got to be something like a "I'm going to repaint my car - I wonder what it would look like" type thing.

Also, have you come across HDR techniques yet?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:06 am (UTC)
Shiny!

Why don't you believe in using digital techniques to make photos look better?

I have heard of HDR, but as I understand it, it requires a static scene to work properly, and pretty much everything I want to photograph is non-static. The only subject I can think of that it might work with is food.

Incidentally, compilerbitch has an interesting post about simulating HDR.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: babysimon
2007-09-25 09:41 am (UTC)
I have tried to build an HDR image (a London sunset) once. I found it very hard work, and the results ended up rather artifical-looking.

The synthetic HDR approach looks interesting though.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: malvino
2007-09-24 10:20 pm (UTC)
Gimp is fun, but I am a photoshopper (and not just the silly animals and stuff I occasionally post to b3ta and my journal)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:11 am (UTC)
Oh, you know, I'd forgotten about your fun photoshopping stuff! I don't read b3ta, so I only see what you post on your journal, but I am a fan.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: endless_change
2007-09-24 10:53 pm (UTC)
I <3 GIMP
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nou
2007-09-25 12:12 am (UTC)
Me too :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: scootersaurus
2007-09-25 03:07 am (UTC)
Wowsers, the touched up picture looks very nice.

I'm wondering if I should give GIMP another try, as it would be nice to do some guilt free photo editing (as I never actually bought Photoshop). ^_^
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: 2shortplanks
2007-09-25 07:26 am (UTC)
[x] Lightroom is magic (even if it costs lots of money)
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: perlmonger
2007-09-25 08:17 am (UTC)
What it does, the gimp does pretty well: there are very few photos I've sent to flickr that haven't at least gone through "auto white balance", "auto levels" or "dup layer » equalize » layer mode=overlay » adjust transparency" (that last being my most common quick fix enhancement), if not more extensive mangling.

The lack of properly integrated raw support and, most importantly, better than 24-bit colour support is what lets it down; CMYK support isn't really an issue for me as I don't do any print work to speak of. Raw processing is a PITA - CinePaint does the job, but it's based on gimp 1 and the raw import filters strip exif data, so that has to be zapped back into the image after finally saving it as a jpeg. Still, at least it's all possible to do and will hopefully only get better…
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: babysimon
2007-09-25 09:39 am (UTC)
Are you running it on Unix? Have you tried the UFRaw plugin?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: perlmonger
2007-09-25 10:07 am (UTC)
Yes (ubuntu x86_64, to be precise), and yes, but I'm clearly out-of-date in my expectations :)

I pretty sure UFRaw lost exif last time I checked, but it's entirely possible I'm wrong… I don't use it as a matter of course as, if I'm shooting raw, I'll generally want to have the full colour depth available to play with in my image editor - which CinePaint gives me, albeit with exif lost. Thanks for the poke, though; UFRaw preserving exif will likely be enough incentive to switch to raw through gimp as my default workflow.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: babysimon
2007-09-25 10:31 am (UTC)
At least the GIMP plugin preserves EXIF. I think the standalone one does too, but might need prodding.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: natf
2007-09-25 11:22 pm (UTC)
I personally use PS and have rarely used the Gimp but if it can do what PS does then the Gimp rocks.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: caramel_betty
2007-10-10 03:05 pm (UTC)
Apparently I didn't tick for being interested in this before. Lord knows why.
(Reply) (Thread)