GIMP 2 for Photographers 471
Jon Allen writes "A glance through any photography magazine will confirm that Adobe Photoshop is the accepted standard image editing software, offering almost unparalleled power and control over your images. However, costing more than many DSLR cameras, for non-professionals it can be a very hard purchase to justify (and of course for Linux users this is a moot point, as Photoshop is not available for their platform). Luckily, the free software community has provided us with an alternative. The GIMP, or Gnu Image Manipulation Program, offers a huge amount of the power of Photoshop but is available at no cost. Additionally GIMP is cross-platform, available for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Unix." Read below for the rest of Jon's review.
The one downside to using GIMP is that most magazines and photography books use Photoshop in their articles and tutorials, so if you do choose GIMP there's a bit more of a learning curve. Now once you're used to GIMP you'll find that many of Photoshop's features have equivalents, albeit with a different user interface, but getting that initial level of experience and familiarity with the software can be rather difficult. The GIMP does come with a manual, but it is really more of a reference guide and while very comprehensive it is not particularly friendly for new users. GIMP 2 for Photographers aims to rectify this.GIMP 2 for Photographers | |
author | Klaus Goelker |
pages | 185 |
publisher | Rocky Nook / O'Reilly |
rating | 9/10 |
reviewer | Jon Allen |
ISBN | 978-1-933952-03-1 |
summary | A great book for anyone with more than a passing interest in improving their photos |
Written clearly from a photographer's point of view (the author is a photographer who also teaches image editing), this book takes a task-oriented approach, looking at the types of editing operations that a photographer would require and then showing how to perform each task in the GIMP.
Rather helpfully, the GIMP software (for Windows, Mac, and Linux) is included on the book's accompanying CD. This means that you can follow each tutorial using the exact same version of software as the author, which really helps to build confidence that you're doing everything right.
I already have GIMP installed on OS X, so to test out the instructions in the book I performed an installation from the CD on a clean Microsoft Windows XP machine.
The exact filenames of the installation packages on the CD differ slightly from those in the accompanying README file, but the instructions in the book do list the correct files and after following this procedure the installation went without a hitch. The setup files do not ask any overly 'techie' questions, so it literally took less than 5 minutes to set up a fully working system.
As well as the GIMP application, the CD also includes all of the sample images used in the book, and for each editing tutorial the "final" image is provided so you can check your own work against the expected result.
Even more usefully, the CD contains an electronic copy of the complete book as a PDF file, so you can keep it on your laptop as a reference guide, invaluable when editing images on location (or on holiday).
I'd have to say that this is without a doubt the most useful CD I've ever received with a book. Providing the applications and example files is good, giving readers instant gratification without needing to deal with downloads and websites (which may well have changed after the book went to press). But including the complete book on the CD as well is nothing short of a masterstroke, and something I'd love to see other publishers adopt.
As for the book itself, the author takes us through basic GIMP operations — opening and saving files, cropping, resizing images, and printing. Once these basics are out of the way, the book moves on to a series of examples based on "real-life" image editing scenarios.
These examples are very well chosen, both in the fact that the vast majority of the techniques shown are genuinely useful, but also in the way that they are ordered. Each example introduces a new feature of the software, building up your knowledge as you work through the book. By the end you can expect to be skilled not only in "standard" editing — adjusting color balance, fixing red-eye, removing dust spots, and so on — but also in compositing, perspective correction, lighting and shadow effects, and building panoramic images.
Between the examples there is a good amount of more "reference" type material, with detailed descriptions of the various menus, tool bars, and dialogs you will encounter while using the software. Combined with lots of well-labelled screenshots this strikes a very good balance, ensuring that even after going through all the tutorials you'll still get value from the book as something to refer back to.
Overall the quality of the writing and general production standard is very high indeed. There are some points where it is noticeable that the book was originally published in German, but this never becomes a stumbling block to the reader's understanding. Most importantly though, the author employs the "show, don't tell" philosophy throughout which is key to successful teaching.
In conclusion, I would have no hesitation in recommending GIMP 2 for Photographers to anyone with more than a passing interest in improving their photos. And even if you already use image editing software, the book is well worth a read — I have been using GIMP for several years and still learned a great deal. The accompanying CD is the icing on the cake, making GIMP 2 for Photographers a simply essential purchase.
You can purchase GIMP 2 for Photographers from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
New version of GIMP? (Score:3, Insightful)
After reading and rereading the article, I think I have come to the conclusion that this is a review of a book, and the review was aimed at the non-slashdot community.
[Ff]ree vs Piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish Gimp were a photoshop clone (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:3, Insightful)
Thing is, it isn't, and never has been as good as photoshop, so the professional world aren't going to accept it while photoshop is better.
And its not just because photoshop is proprietary, its just better suited to what the professional photographer and artist need to make a living. Gimp needs several more years with a much *much* larger workforce and some serious intent to make it so good that people won't even think of using anything else, and I don't see that happening just yet.
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:[Ff]ree vs Piracy (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why Photoshop has such good market penetration. The perceived need for it drives BOTH purchase and piracy, which reinforce it as a standard. This model works very well and there is no reason to change it.
Want to reinforce OSS alternatives to commercial soft? Join the fight against warez to keep the competition from getting the benefits of "pirates" chumming the market with their stuff!
Deep Color (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about the oft-slagged interface, it's about actual capability falling behind the curve.
It's going to be a common rant in this thread, I am sure, but the fact is, GIMP is falling behind because it has not yet mainstreamed any support for "deep color." It is stuck in an 8-bits-per-channel world, which is fine for many forms of web graphics and proofing, but has some serious limitations in advanced photography. Many photographers are getting quite interested in HDR, RAW, and ICC. What few plugins exist for these in the GIMP world are incomplete and only allow you to import their results back into the limits of an 8-bits-per-channel world.
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P (Score:5, Insightful)
This is why most linux applications are nowhere near ready for the desktop.
not flaming.
Re:GIMP != Photoshop (Score:4, Insightful)
For Web work, The Gimp is unrivaled. For some sorts of print work, I would either use Photoshop or Inkscape, depending on what it was that I needed to do. For editing stills for film, I'd use Cinepaint or Photoshop.
PS CS3 costs more than a DSLR? Um... no... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're going to pony up between £500 and £1000 for a camera, then it's worth factoring in the price of software, especially as you don't need to buy film.
I mean that's like getting a film SLR and moaning about the cost of darkroom kit... it's the same with any hobby; horse riding isn't just the price of a horse, fishing isn't just the price of a rod and digital photography isn't just the price of a digital camera, you have to account for all the necessary extras as they say...
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:1, Insightful)
"However, costing more than many DSLR cameras, for non-professionals it(Photoshop) can be a very hard purchase to justify"
The purely pro market that Photoshop absolutely can't be replaced in isn't a big market. The Gimp is perfect for 95% of people's photo manipulation needs, though, and that's why it's great software. You don't have to pay anything for software that is more powerful than almost any home user will ever be able to fully utilize.
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P (Score:2, Insightful)
Sheesh. You're really stretching to find a reason. It doesn't do it because Adobe hasn't put it in. And the reason they haven't is probably because there's not a lot of call for it. That seems like a perfectly reasonable answer.
Photoshop is an amazing program. I'm surprised the reviewer wrote "almost unparalleled." It's flat-out unparalleled. But it's undo, and even its history feature, are not as good as they could be.
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, that is my opinion. Your own may differ...
THAT interface (Score:4, Insightful)
People who complain about Gimp's interface aren't just whingeing for the sake of it. Gimp is immensely capable, but dear god, why is the interface split across so many windows? Photo editing in Gimp is a chore, chasing little windows around the desktop with the mouse.
It's a terrible pity, because so much work has gone into making Gimp. To can do almost everything an amateur photographer could want, but after a few weeks using it I went looking for an alternative and bought Photoshop Elements. Elements is missing a few features, but it's a pleasure to use, and that's why so many people use it instead of Gimp.
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:No 16bit support (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sick and fucking tired of you little bitches saying open source is sooo much better, but when someone points out that you're MISSING A CRITICAL FEATURE... y'all act like cunts and scream that "no one owes you anything".
Seriously.
Release a commercial level product or get the fuck out of the market.
Go ahead. Mod me down. I don't give a shit. Most people agree with me.
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P (Score:5, Insightful)
That might be the best UI insult I have every seen
Re:GIMP has some issues (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:CMYK is irrelevant (Score:3, Insightful)
Your issue #3 is the one that always jumps out and bites me whenever I'm using GIMP. You don't have to have adjustment layers, but once you're used to them, it's hard as hell to go back.
Re:CMYK is irrelevant (Score:3, Insightful)
I would say that amateurs (as well as artists and illustrators) actually need the extra channels even more then professionals do, as amateurs rely on post processing more, where as a professional will usually strive to get it all in camera if possible so as to minimize the amount of work they have to put into the shoot.
Re:GIMP has some issues (Score:3, Insightful)
No, you didn't. It's more like this:
The rest of that fluff you added to the translation might actually hold water if there wasn't already enough demand to cause GIMPShop to be created.
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P (Score:4, Insightful)
Two reasons (Score:3, Insightful)
For the love of god, rename it! (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, as some borderline autist developer, you may not care about such things, and think their embarrassment is stupid and irrational. but arty types - including digital media workers - tend to be emotional and less than entiely rational. They're *all about appearances*. When they're talking shop to their colleagues, they don't want to be saying "I just opened up the gimp".
Re:In a lot of ways, Gimp is more intuitive than P (Score:1, Insightful)
You don't really understand what dumbing down means, do you ?
They don't dumb down the innards of the cars. Just like you are not dumbing down the code running the software. You are making the UI easier to use. In the case of your vehicles, they make it easier to steer, brake and so on. And they make them safer and safer.
A driver is not a mechanic. And a photographer is not a programmer. Photographers don't care for UIs designed by programmers for programmers.
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, that sums up my experience with Photoshop quite well....
I rather liked Paint Shop Pro, and bought upgrades faithfully from version 1 right up through 7 or so. It was bliss. Left mouse button, right mouse button. Foreground, background. Simple, obvious, ergonomically sound.
Then Corel got their hooks into it. PSP X is maddening.
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed. I have trouble even pinning down one specific aspect of it that is the problem, because so much is wrong with it.
The one that always sticks in my mind is how when I create text, rather than simply creating a new layer with the text in it, the GIMP also sets that new layer to be only just big enough to hold the text, so if I've made text in the center of a larger image, the text layer has a border of null space around it. So if I try to do something like manually create a drop shadow effect, most of it will be clipped at the edges.
Now that I know that this is the case, I can resize the layer to be big enough (although I wish I could just enable a checkbox where this would be the default behavior, because I would have to do it *all* of the time assuming the GIMP were my main image editor). But before then? It took me hours to figure out that that's what was happening, because I had no idea someone would ever design an image editing app that way.
Also, the file dialogues are horrendous (other than being able to pick the file type to save as by typing the appropriate extension, which is clever). Maybe they work better on Linux, but on Windows they are the clunkiest things ever. Would it really be that hard to at least allow the use of the OS's own file dialogues, if not make it the default behavior?
Adobe has gotten a bit sloppy about the quality of the last few revisions of Photoshop (having to delete my preferences file to make Merge To HDR work? Am I suddenly on a Macintosh running OS 8.5 in 1999 again?), so an alternative that worked solidly would be awesome.
Re:How come no FREE version of this BOOK ?? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:2, Insightful)
For the majority of artists/users, with the possible exception of those who wish to print directly from the app, GIMP has more than enough power to deal with their demands. The problem with it's low adoption is threefold; learning curve, advertising and name. The learning curve is a big problem. The UI is even more awful than PS's (which is saying something) and this is compounded by the lack good training material or training courses available. Advertising speaks for itself, Adobe can afford it, gimp can't. The name is also a factor here. I recently got quizzed on software by an 'older' artist wishing to go from film to digital. I mentioned GIMP and got a dirty look, trying to make him see past the name was a big issue and in the end he went for Photoshop, 'cos of the brand name. I suspect this is an even bigger problem with the suits in the corporate environ.... this is a wider open-source issue too.
Personally, I use Paint Shop Pro, it's dirt cheap and the designers actually bothered to make a UI that enables a degree of efficiency. It's quite surprising how many people use it (and others) in the industry, yet hide behind Photoshop when discussing editors, almost as if they are afraid to admit they aren't using the industry standard. Yet the work they produce is just as good and usually produced faster... Adobe has built a mythos that their overpriced product is the be-all and end-all for graphics work. It's bullshit. They have the monopoly, that is all. There are many, often cheaper or free, programs just as capable (and more-so in some areas of work). A lot of these programs also support PS plugins just fine.
Re:New version of GIMP? (Score:3, Insightful)