2007-09-24 05:15 pm (UTC)
[x] wish I knew how to drive it properly ;-)
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.
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).
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!
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.
2007-09-25 12:00 am (UTC)
I've never used Paintshop, so I don't really know how they compare. I was basically squeeing about photo manipulation tools in general :)
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?
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...
2007-09-24 07:00 pm (UTC)
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?
2007-09-25 12:06 am (UTC)
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.
has an interesting post
about simulating HDR.
Gimp is fun, but I am a photoshopper (and not just the silly animals and stuff I occasionally post to b3ta and my journal)
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.
2007-09-25 12:12 am (UTC)
Me too :)
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). ^_^
[x] Lightroom is magic (even if it costs lots of money)
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…
Are you running it on Unix? Have you tried the UFRaw plugin?
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.
Apparently I didn't tick for being interested in this before. Lord knows why.