Digital Art Zone

 
   
2 of 2
2
Gimp
Posted: 29 November 2012 03:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5352
Joined  2008-03-06
wancow - 29 November 2012 03:16 PM

It has quite a few changes… the Brush controls are a little different, and some custom brushes have been added since my 2.6 install.

But I think I’m going to get a scheister lawyer and sue over having to use the Export function to save a JPEG… it’s just enough to cause carpel tunnel syndrome in my big left toe.


I hate that change with a fiery, burning passion.  It is more technically correct, but that is not a good reason to make a feature user-unfriendly. :p It’s my only real complaint with the newest versions.


Everyone expects to see save-as, that’s the shortcut everyone has hardwired from every other program, WHAT’S WRONG WITH SAVE AS???


Whew, sorry.  Rant off.

 Signature 

My store at DAZ.

My Deviantart gallery and tutorials.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 03:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  358
Joined  2005-11-24

I just ran into that myself trying to do a save as.

 Signature 
Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 03:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4524
Joined  2007-09-13
SickleYield - 29 November 2012 03:17 PM
wancow - 29 November 2012 03:16 PM

It has quite a few changes… the Brush controls are a little different, and some custom brushes have been added since my 2.6 install.

But I think I’m going to get a scheister lawyer and sue over having to use the Export function to save a JPEG… it’s just enough to cause carpel tunnel syndrome in my big left toe.


I hate that change with a fiery, burning passion.  It is more technically correct, but that is not a good reason to make a feature user-unfriendly. :p It’s my only real complaint with the newest versions.


Everyone expects to see save-as, that’s the shortcut everyone has hardwired from every other program, WHAT’S WRONG WITH SAVE AS???


Whew, sorry.  Rant off.

That’s why I mentioned that particular little ‘gem’ in my first post…I’m ready to smack the dev who came up with that idea upside the head with a 3 day old fish…

 Signature 

1432 old posts

My ShareCG gallery.

Just because something costs a lot, doesn’t mean it’s the best…

It just means it’s expensive.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 07:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  232
Joined  2003-10-09
wancow - 29 November 2012 10:54 AM

For the most part, GIMP is every bit as powerful as PhotoPoop… And ADOBE is notorious for making buggy, crash prone software…

Notorious for making buggy, crash prone software? Hardly.  I have to completely disagree. I’ve been using Photoshop for over 14 years and I’ve never had it crash on me, not once. It’s the most stable software I’ve ever used.


Coldrake

 Signature 

I don’t dance, I boogie.
———————————————————

If I have to choose between speed and quality, I’ll take quality every time.
———————————————————

It’s not what tools you use,
It’s how you use your tools.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 07:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4524
Joined  2007-09-13

Two reasons I started using GIMP…PS would always crash for me (didn’t have a Matrox video card back then and back in the mid/late 90s Matrox was the card for that kind of work.) and the price.  A good friend had a Matox card (he did photo work, professionally) and it was as stable as the Rock of Gibraltar for him.  The first version of GIMP I used was a point release before v1 and it was more stable for me than PS ever was.  I also tried PaintShop Pro and didn’t like it. 

PS is a very demanding application and pretty much requires ‘perfection’...both in hardware and OS setup.  And for the price, you’d best be using it to be making some money, because for the casual user, I can think of a lot of other things to spend that kind of dough on…and just because something costs a lot doesn’t make it the best…it just makes it expensive.

 Signature 

1432 old posts

My ShareCG gallery.

Just because something costs a lot, doesn’t mean it’s the best…

It just means it’s expensive.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 09:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5352
Joined  2008-03-06
Coldrake - 29 November 2012 07:12 PM
wancow - 29 November 2012 10:54 AM

For the most part, GIMP is every bit as powerful as PhotoPoop… And ADOBE is notorious for making buggy, crash prone software…

Notorious for making buggy, crash prone software? Hardly.  I have to completely disagree. I’ve been using Photoshop for over 14 years and I’ve never had it crash on me, not once. It’s the most stable software I’ve ever used.


Coldrake


Two words: preference file.


During my brief acquaintance with trying to make a school’s copies of InDesign work, I learned to hate it.  Acrobat is a cow in every possible way other than eating grass and mooing, and PSE loaded at a rate similar to Poser Pro.  I never bought the full version because I didn’t want to deal with the hassle. 


I’ve never had a Matrox card, either.  On my budget I’ve had to make do with whatever the current middle-of-line was from Nvidia or, back then, AMD.

 Signature 

My store at DAZ.

My Deviantart gallery and tutorials.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 November 2012 09:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4524
Joined  2007-09-13

I did eventually end up with a Matrox card…from my buddy when he upgraded.  He sent me his old dual head card.  Too bad I don’t have a motherboard that will run it, any longer…original AGP 1x version.  Ran that card for a couple of years…

 Signature 

1432 old posts

My ShareCG gallery.

Just because something costs a lot, doesn’t mean it’s the best…

It just means it’s expensive.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 November 2012 09:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2673
Joined  2011-12-10
Coldrake - 29 November 2012 07:12 PM
wancow - 29 November 2012 10:54 AM

For the most part, GIMP is every bit as powerful as PhotoPoop… And ADOBE is notorious for making buggy, crash prone software…

Notorious for making buggy, crash prone software? Hardly.  I have to completely disagree. I’ve been using Photoshop for over 14 years and I’ve never had it crash on me, not once. It’s the most stable software I’ve ever used.


Coldrake

Flash: Notoriously buggy, Crash Prone Software.  Adobe Illustrator: Notoriously Buggy, Crash Prone Software. Acrobat Reader: Notoriously Buggy, Crash Prone software… need I go on?  I’m not going to argue about it with you, but you are one of the very few I’ve ever seen tell of how PS has never given them a problem.  The only reason Adobe got off the ground was because it teamed up with Apple early on.  Since then Apple dumped them because, they say, Adobe Makes Buggy, Crash Prone Software.  That’s Apple Computers talking, not me, though personal experience backs them up.  Apple Computers may be an evil spawn of fascists totalitarians out for world domination, but when they’re right, they’re right…

 Signature 

My DeviantArt Galleries
My ShareCG Gallery
OPENSUBDIV Testing and Discussion
3Delight Surface and Lighting Thread

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 November 2012 09:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  37
Joined  2009-11-20
HeraldOfFire - 29 November 2012 10:53 AM

Gimp can save in multiple formats which Daz can use. Just save your photo as a JPG or PNG (for lossy or lossless compression respectively) and you can load it into Daz as a texture map or a background.

I use Gimp because I’m cheap smile

A follow up question:  Is there anything similar to the “3D Bridge for Photoshop” that would make it easier to move between Daz and Gimp without exporting, switching applications, and refreshing texture images?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 November 2012 10:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Power Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  1351
Joined  2009-01-09
ShawnDonaldson - 30 November 2012 09:10 PM

A follow up question:  Is there anything similar to the “3D Bridge for Photoshop” that would make it easier to move between Daz and Gimp without exporting, switching applications, and refreshing texture images?

I don’t think so, but I’m not sure. I tried to install the 3D Bridge when I first got Studio 4 Pro, and it basically said, “I know not this thing called ‘GIMP’. Where be ye olde Photoshop?”

SickleYield - 29 November 2012 03:17 PM
wancow - 29 November 2012 03:16 PM

It has quite a few changes… the Brush controls are a little different, and some custom brushes have been added since my 2.6 install.

But I think I’m going to get a scheister lawyer and sue over having to use the Export function to save a JPEG… it’s just enough to cause carpel tunnel syndrome in my big left toe.

I hate that change with a fiery, burning passion.  It is more technically correct, but that is not a good reason to make a feature user-unfriendly. :p It’s my only real complaint with the newest versions.

Everyone expects to see save-as, that’s the shortcut everyone has hardwired from every other program, WHAT’S WRONG WITH SAVE AS???

Whew, sorry.  Rant off.

I don’t understand why they made that change, either ... although, in a way, it’s a bit less user-unfriendly than the old method, where you’d do a “Save As”, and then during the process, the export function would make its appearance. You always did have to export; they just exposed the function.

I am running into one really odd difference between 2.8 and 2.6, and it’s bad enough that I keep both versions installed. For some reason, 2.8 seems to be really intolerant of certain brushes. It’s not something I can predict, and sometimes it seems to have as much to do with numbers as much as anything else. But, for example, I just installed a bunch of brushes that I picked up from the bundle that Ron has on sale.

2.8: Slow, sluggish start, followed by a trip to Crash City.

2.6: Normally slow start (GIMP is not the snappiest program around, and a large number of brushes will slow down the start while it parses the directory) followed by no problems whatsoever.

I wish I knew what the difference was. It makes no sense that the 32-bit program can take every brush in my system with no problem (... and there are kind of a lot, I admit) while the 64-bit version becomes incredibly fragile.  Yet when I pull those brushes from the 2.8 brush directory, it’s fine. (The really confusing thing there is that each program seems to be able to see the other’s brushes directory, but I’ve given up trying to understand why this works like this.)

 Signature 

VWrangler at deviantArt (NSFW for some images; login required to view those)

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2