Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop

Liste des GroupesRevenir à ol advocacy 
Sujet : Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop
De : recscuba_google (at) *nospam* huntzinger.com (-hh)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date : 06. Jan 2025, 21:59:14
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vlhg72$1mrpk$3@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 1/6/25 3:18 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:12:21 -0500, -hh wrote:
 
On 1/5/25 8:24 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:51:51 -0500, -hh wrote:
>
... needs to explain how & why it is significant for there to be
floating point at all, since the input sensor is integer based ...
>
OpenEXR files are commonly used in CG these days, and they have
floating- point numbers for each pixel component. They also allow for
more than 3-4 pixel components. The values still have their usual
meaning, with 0 being full black and 1.0 being full white, but the
values are allowed to go outside this range to avoid clipping of
dynamic range.
>
Dynamic range is why to support more bits, but that's oblique to adding
more intermediate values by using floating point instead of integer.
 That, too, seems to be important to them. You’d think single-precision
floats would be enough, but no, they want the option for double-precision
as well.
Let's see a product output from each and if the alleged differences are even perceptible by humans (without pixel peeping, of course).

GIMP’s GEGL pixel engine deals natively with such things. Photoshop
needs to use import/export filters which inevitably lose quality.
>
But isn't integral vs modular just a software architectural design
choice?
 The limiting factor is what the native pixel engine can handle. And
Photoshop’s one is pretty limited compared to GEGL.
Yet both are limited by what the original image source is too:  when one only has 10-12-14 bits/channel, it requires gyrations to claim that double precision 32 bit floating point is going to be noticeable.

This is probably why Adobe products are not used much in VFX work.
>
Adobe's product here is probably After Effects, and it supports formats
such as ProRes, where the originals are integer 10 or 12 bits/channel.
 But it’s not a node-based compositor, is it? Even Blender can do better
than that.
Don't really know yet, as I've been more stills-centric than video, with effectively all of it being reality-based instead of fake.
-hh

Date Sujet#  Auteur
4 Jan 25 * Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop32Farley Flud
5 Jan 25 `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop31DFS
5 Jan 25  `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop30-hh
5 Jan 25   +* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop4Farley Flud
6 Jan 25   i+* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop2-hh
6 Jan 25   ii`- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1Farley Flud
6 Jan 25   i`- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1DFS
6 Jan 25   `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop25Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Jan 25    `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop24-hh
6 Jan 25     `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop23Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Jan 25      `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop22-hh
6 Jan 25       `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop21Lawrence D'Oliveiro
7 Jan 25        `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop20-hh
7 Jan 25         +- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
7 Jan 25         `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop18Farley Flud
8 Jan 25          `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop17Physfitfreak
8 Jan 25           `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop16Farley Flud
8 Jan 25            `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop15Physfitfreak
8 Jan 25             +- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1Physfitfreak
8 Jan 25             `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop13Farley Flud
8 Jan 25              `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop12Physfitfreak
8 Jan 25               `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop11Farley Flud
9 Jan 25                +* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop3Physfitfreak
9 Jan 25                i`* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop2Physfitfreak
9 Jan 25                i `- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1Physfitfreak
9 Jan 25                `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop7rbowman
10 Jan 25                 `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop6Physfitfreak
10 Jan 25                  +- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1DFS
10 Jan 25                  `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop4Farley Flud
10 Jan 25                   +- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1DFS
11 Jan 25                   `* Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop2Physfitfreak
11 Jan 25                    `- Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop1DFS

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal