free

stefan wrote:
> whats the best free ware for photo editing

Irfanview
 >> Stay informed about: free 

stefan wrote:
> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>
You might try The Gimp, but expect a VERY steep learning curve, and an
'odd' interface.
If you have minimal editing needs, Irfanview may suit your needs.
 >> Stay informed about: free 

ray wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 04:19:39 -0800, stefan wrote:
>
>> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>
> GIMP is pretty good.
>

Get Ifanview regardless of what else you have. Also, FastStone is really
very good and it's free. Excellent for quick user defined crops, color
correction email etc. It could well be all you need.
The Gimp is pretty near darned impossible, I couldn't even figure out
it's stupid crop tool, but it's free so by all means try it. Personally
I use Irfanview, FastStone and PhotoPlus.
Dave Cohen
 >> Stay informed about: free 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:50:37 +0000, Dave Cohen wrote:

> ray wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 04:19:39 -0800, stefan wrote:
>>
>>> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>>
>> GIMP is pretty good.
>>
>
> Get Ifanview regardless of what else you have. Also, FastStone is really
> very good and it's free. Excellent for quick user defined crops, color
> correction email etc. It could well be all you need.
> The Gimp is pretty near darned impossible, I couldn't even figure out
> it's stupid crop tool, but it's free so by all means try it. Personally
> I use Irfanview, FastStone and PhotoPlus.
> Dave Cohen

That might be acceptable to the OP - it would do me no good since it seems
to be available for MS only. I run a Linux only world - five home
computers (I believe that one of them may actually have a bootable XP on
it, but it's been so long since I've tried it I'm no longer sure) and
eight more I administer for the local library.
 >> Stay informed about: free 

Il 31/01/2007 13:19, stefan dixit:
> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>
http://www.gimp.org

--
I love to be mailed just by smart people:
perl -we 'print "\12\142\145\162\156\141\155\141\100\151".
"\164\167\145\142\56\151\164\12\12";'
Spammers scratch here with a diamond to find my address:
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 >> Stay informed about: free 

stefan skrev:
> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>

Take a look here:
http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2007/PL2007GRAPHICS.php

regards from

--
Vegard Krog Petersen - Norway


http://vegard2.no -
Solitaire MahJongg guide, Sarah Michelle Gellar Solitaire,
Freeware Logo & symbol, Halma & Chinese Checkers,
Pachisi & Ludo, Freeware Solitaire, My fishy site (fishing
games), a.c.f.g information, Fredrikshald Havfiskeklubb
18+ sites: Firefoxy, Adult Solitaire, Fishy Pictures,
Sexy Chess, Sexy Librarians, Sexy Football
---------------------------------------------------------
 >> Stay informed about: free 

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:57:50 +0100, Vegard Krog Petersen
<vegard_krog_petersen.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:

>stefan skrev:
>> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>>
>
>Take a look here:
>http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/2007/PL2007GRAPHICS.php
>
>regards from

Good site, I see they have a free download of the
French PhotoFiltre with English version.
This is an excellent free photo editor comparable to
Photoshop. Lots of filters etc.
 >> Stay informed about: free 

Dave Cohen wrote:

> The Gimp is pretty near darned impossible, I couldn't even figure out
> it's stupid crop tool.

I presume that you are joking - or haven't looked very hard.
There is very little difference in complexity of user interface between
PS and the Gimp IMO. It's just different.
There are IMO only two reasons to use PS instead of Gimp. One is for 16
bit colour depth support - which may be irrelevant depending on workflow
from camera raw files, the other is for printing in a colour managed
workflow - for which other programs (like QImage) do a better job than
PS anyway.
I started using the Gimp on *nix workstations. Now I'm using Windows -
I find that I use Gimp more than PS - because it does the job - and
because I'm familiar with the interface, I find it easier to use.
 >> Stay informed about: free 

Ron Hunter <rphunter DeleteThis @charter.net> wrote:
> stefan wrote:
>> whats the best free ware for photo editing
>>
> You might try The Gimp, but expect a VERY steep learning curve, and an
> 'odd' interface.
> If you have minimal editing needs, Irfanview may suit your needs.

And then there's Gimpshop, a reworking of GIMP to make it more like
Photoshop:

http://www.plasticbugs.com/?page_id=294

--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
 >> Stay informed about: free 

frederick wrote:
>
> Dave Cohen wrote:
>
> > The Gimp is pretty near darned impossible, I couldn't even figure out
> > it's stupid crop tool.
>
> I presume that you are joking - or haven't looked very hard.
> There is very little difference in complexity of user interface between
> PS and the Gimp IMO. It's just different.
> There are IMO only two reasons to use PS instead of Gimp. One is for 16
> bit colour depth support - which may be irrelevant depending on workflow
> from camera raw files, the other is for printing in a colour managed
> workflow - for which other programs (like QImage) do a better job than
> PS anyway.
> I started using the Gimp on *nix workstations. Now I'm using Windows -
> I find that I use Gimp more than PS - because it does the job - and
> because I'm familiar with the interface, I find it easier to use.


Hello, Frederick:

Several months ago, I obtained GIMPshop. I found it rather difficult
to use, despite your claims about GIMP, above; Paint Shop Pro, for
example, is infinitely more intuitive.

Thus, PSP is my preferred graphics program, by a huge margin. (I'm
strictly a Windows operator, by the way.)


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur RemoveThis @concentric.net>
 >> Stay informed about: free 

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 04:47:11 +0000, John Turco wrote:

> frederick wrote:
>>
>> Dave Cohen wrote:
>>
>> > The Gimp is pretty near darned impossible, I couldn't even figure out
>> > it's stupid crop tool.
>>
>> I presume that you are joking - or haven't looked very hard. There is
>> very little difference in complexity of user interface between PS and
>> the Gimp IMO. It's just different. There are IMO only two reasons to
>> use PS instead of Gimp. One is for 16 bit colour depth support - which
>> may be irrelevant depending on workflow from camera raw files, the
>> other is for printing in a colour managed workflow - for which other
>> programs (like QImage) do a better job than PS anyway. I started using
>> the Gimp on *nix workstations. Now I'm using Windows - I find that I
>> use Gimp more than PS - because it does the job - and because I'm
>> familiar with the interface, I find it easier to use.
>
> Several months ago, I obtained GIMPshop. I found it rather difficult to
> use, despite your claims about GIMP, above; Paint Shop Pro, for example,
> is infinitely more intuitive.
>
> Thus, PSP is my preferred graphics program, by a huge margin. (I'm
> strictly a Windows operator, by the way.)
>
It is simply a matter of familiarity. I am using Gimp for many years. When
I tried PSCS on a friend's PC I found it quite difficult to use. PSCS is
suppossed to be very intuitive but it did not appear to be so to me. It is
just that I have never used it before and have got accustomed to a
different software and its ways. Gimp has all the necessary functions and
many plug-ins to do additional bits of image manipulation.

--
gautam
 >> Stay informed about: free 

Gautam Majumdar <gmajumdar DeleteThis @freeuk.com> wrote:

: It is simply a matter of familiarity. I am using Gimp for many years.
: When I tried PSCS on a friend's PC I found it quite difficult to use.
: PSCS is suppossed to be very intuitive but it did not appear to be so
: to me. It is just that I have never used it before and have got
: accustomed to a different software and its ways. Gimp has all the
: necessary functions and many plug-ins to do additional bits of image
: manipulation.

I agree. Much of the "ease of use" or "intuitive" use of any program is
dependant on prior experience. I have an elderly relative that tried to
use a word processor to type a page of text and gave up ands went back to
the old manual typewriter because he wasn't able to work the processor. It
was very intuitive to all the rest of us, but it just didn't work the way
his old manual typewriter did.

Or another way to look at it. If you are taught to drive with an automatic
transmittion it is very hard to drive a manual transmittion auto at first.
And vise versa. And the longer you stick to one type or the other the
harder it is to learn the other skill. Your automatic reactions don't work
anymore. Even if you were taught on both and are very comfortable
switching back and forth (like I am) it still takes a moment to reaquaint
yourself with a new vehicle.

So all of the responders recommending "the easiest" program are right. For
them this particular program is easy to use and easy to learn. And at the
same time those who are finding those same programs confusing are also
right that that particular program just isn't right for them.

JMHO

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL
 >> Stay informed about: free 

On 02 Feb 2007 23:47:11 EST, John Turco <jtur.TakeThisOut@concentric.net> wrote:

>frederick wrote:
>>
>> Dave Cohen wrote:
>>
>> > The Gimp is pretty near darned impossible, I couldn't even figure out
>> > it's stupid crop tool.
>>
>> I presume that you are joking - or haven't looked very hard.
>> There is very little difference in complexity of user interface between
>> PS and the Gimp IMO. It's just different.
>> There are IMO only two reasons to use PS instead of Gimp. One is for 16
>> bit colour depth support - which may be irrelevant depending on workflow
>> from camera raw files, the other is for printing in a colour managed
>> workflow - for which other programs (like QImage) do a better job than
>> PS anyway.
>> I started using the Gimp on *nix workstations. Now I'm using Windows -
>> I find that I use Gimp more than PS - because it does the job - and
>> because I'm familiar with the interface, I find it easier to use.
>
>
>Hello, Frederick:
>
>Several months ago, I obtained GIMPshop. I found it rather difficult
>to use, despite your claims about GIMP, above; Paint Shop Pro, for
>example, is infinitely more intuitive.

It is if you're already familiar with an earlier version.
Put someone with no photo editing experience in front of either Gimp
or PSP, and watch the results. Neither is "intuitive."
PSP's various parts are better integrated, though.

--
The New York Yankees signed a
deal with China Monday to expand
baseball into the world's largest
nation. The people of China meet
the first test of what it takes
to be great baseball fans. They
are not fussy at all about what
goes into a hot dog.
 >> Stay informed about: free