> "Why not Gimp" you may ask. Well have you ever compared gimp with Photoshop?
> Gimp has one mildly annoying problem, which isn't too hard to get around and
> one show stopper. The mildly annoying problem is that the tool sets can be
> a little tricky to use. Aha, you say, but there is Gimpshop. But Gimpshop
> doesn't work with Gimp 2.6, only with an older version (2.2 I think). Gimp 2.6
> worked fine, I installed Gimpshop, and then Gimp wouldn't even load: the mini
> gimp icon went bounce, bounce, bounce and nothing ever happened. Sure sign
> of a dependency issue! So I uninstalled gimpshop, and Gimp 2.6 worked fine
> again.
My big problem with the Gimp is that all the little windows are really
old-fashioned. I'm used to environments where I don't need to manually
move windows around and then still not get the windows placed in a
manner I can use them all at once without my desktop showing through.
A minor annoyance to be sure, but an annoyance to be sure.
> But this isn't the show stopper. The show stopper is the fact that Gimp
> does not support more than 8bits per channel! I'm sorry but it is precisely this sort
> of shortcoming that separates professional photo software from
> non-professional. If you tell me I can't have smoother gradients, I'll go somewhere
> else where I can get the smoother gradients, and that somewhere is photoshop. If
> only the Gimp people were as efficient at improving their, software as the Ubuntu
> people are, maybe Gimp would be able to support more than 8 bits
> per channel by now. And the day that they do, is the day that I blow away
> windows XP partition. I don't need to wait for Adobe to jump on the Linux
> bandwagon, but this presumes, that the Gimp folks get there act together. Now
> having gimpshop work with gimp 2.6 or later would be nice, but as I say it is not a
> show stopper. Not having more than 8 bits per channel really is!
It is odd that they don't have floating-point support for the color
channels. There are open-source file-formats that support
floating-point colors (as well as >8 bits per color). Floating-point
color channels would completely clear up the issue.
Also, I really thought 12-16 bits per color were fairly common in many
environments.
But then again, when you select the "Color space" you can only select
"RGB", "Greyscale" and not "HSV" or "CYMK". -- And it gives you no
indication that there's any options for differing bits per
color-channel.
I suspect none of the developers have considered it important. The
advantage of open-source software is that you can check to see if it
is on the list of things that will ever happen, and if no one has
thought of it you can provide the idea.
Cheers,
Steven Black
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
No comments:
Post a Comment