login info join!
Forums > Digital Art and Retouching > A 3 part question. Search   Reply
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 23 13 10:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
jesse paulk
Posts: 3,712
Phoenix, Arizona, US


to stay away from all of them
Feb 23 13 10:20 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Let the wars begin.
Feb 23 13 10:29 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 23 13 10:33 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
NothingIsRealButTheGirl
Posts: 32,542
Los Angeles, California, US


It's great that GIMP exists, and it's quite capable, but I use Photoshop.

Don't know the third.
Feb 23 13 10:37 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
JimBobLc
Posts: 199
Martinsburg, West Virginia, US


Are you planning to buy one? I suggest use a free software (like paint.net) until you get to the point where you are consistently finding things you need to do that it won't let you do.
Then use the trial versions of the pay softwares to see how they handle the things you can't do easily in the free ware.
Then purchase the pay software that lets you do what you want to do.

But seems like PS is the industry standard probably easier to get help from other users if you find yourself wanting to do things in PS that you can't figure out on your own.
Feb 23 13 10:37 am  Link  Quote 
Artist/Painter
MainePaintah
Posts: 1,703
Saco, Maine, US


1) Do not know anything about it.

2) Do not have the time to learn it.

3) My wife downloaded a copy to make her Facebook and personal photos look good. It is not for professional photos. It has a big tendency to "warp" faces.
Feb 23 13 10:38 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Skydancer Photos
Posts: 21,905
Santa Cruz, California, US


Moderator Warning!

jesse paulk wrote:
to stay away from all of them

If you have nothing of value to add to a legitimate discussion, perhaps you should "stay away"

Feb 23 13 10:44 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
descending chain
Posts: 1,146
Fullerton, California, US


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
What is your opinion on:

1) Gimp?

2) Photoshop?

3) Portrait Professional?

Notorious troll should go elsewhere.

Feb 23 13 10:54 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
jesse paulk
Posts: 3,712
Phoenix, Arizona, US


Post hidden on Feb 23, 2013 11:34 am
Reason: not helpful
Comments:
If you can't contribute to a legitimate discussion without trolling or focusing on the person (not the topic), you will be brigged.
Feb 23 13 11:00 am  Link 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 23 13 11:07 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,597
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
What is your opinion on:

1) Gimp?

2) Photoshop?

3) Portrait Professional?

Gimp = good enough for 99% of the work you see on here. A lot of guys boast about 32bit editing and CMYK support that Photoshop gives you, then you see that for them these are just words smile

As a free download Gimp is pretty hard to beat.

Photoshop = if the get the full version then it's great, does lots of funky stuff some of which you you cant do with Gimp. The cut down version (PS Elements) is god too - but very much same same as Gimp in terms of features.

Portrait Professional = actually pretty good for a quick fix. Dont set the corrections too high and it can give you a quick retouch will will usually make your pictures a lot better. You cant do the same subtle effects you can with the full version of PS so it's not really a competitor though.

Feb 23 13 11:11 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,597
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


descending chain wrote:

Notorious troll should go elsewhere.

isn't that a personal attack?

Feb 23 13 11:12 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Imageography
Posts: 6,768
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada


I have used Gimp a lot on my Linux machines, but I own (bought) Photoshop and got certified with Adobe, so that is where my heart lies.

I hate portrait professional. Even their ads show such a transformation from human to plastic. I do like soft skin though, and use the Imagenomic Portraiture 2.3 plugin which you can do much better with.

As a related note, I also bought OnOne version 6 which had Perfect Portrait. Again, I find it useless for my workflow. I have since upgraded to version 7.1 and it is not much better for that, although the other filters are handy from time to time.

Bottom line, if you can learn in Photoshop how to do the effects without using filters, then, you can adequately determine which filters you can use as a time saving feature without overdoing it.

I'm no expert, I have just been doing this a long time.
Feb 23 13 11:28 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Skydancer Photos
Posts: 21,905
Santa Cruz, California, US


Moderator Warning!
No more trolling or off topic hijacks.

Thanks
Feb 23 13 11:29 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Virtual Studio wrote:

Gimp = good enough for 99% of the work you see on here. A lot of guys boast about 32bit editing and CMYK support that Photoshop gives you, then you see that for them these are just words smile

As a free download Gimp is pretty hard to beat.

Photoshop = if the get the full version then it's great, does lots of funky stuff some of which you you cant do with Gimp. The cut down version (PS Elements) is good too - but very much same same as Gimp in terms of features.

Portrait Professional = actually pretty good for a quick fix. Dont set the corrections too high and it can give you a quick retouch will will usually make your pictures a lot better. You cant do the same subtle effects you can with the full version of PS so it's not really a competitor though.

This except that GIMP is a little more high-tech than Elements - It allows you much broader access to color curves, dodge and burn, and other advanced things. I use GIMP for my heavier parts of retouching, Elements for certain things. My workflow actually involves opening the same image back and forth in both for the things I need, mainly because elements can run some plugins GIMP can't.

Feb 23 13 11:30 am  Link  Quote 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 23 13 12:26 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Caitin Bre
Posts: 1,910
Naperville, Illinois, US


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
What is your opinion on:

1) Gimp?

2) Photoshop?

3) Portrait Professional?

1) Yes!

2) Yes, Yes!

3) No, No, No!

I also like Corel Paintshop Pro Ultimate x5.
I use Photoshop cs6 and Lightroom 4.3 for most everything now, Lightroom is a must have if you are working with RAW files.
Gimp and Photoshop have a Sharp learning curve.
Paintshop Pro or Photoshop elements are a little more easy to learn the tools, then make the transition.

All the tutorials are good for Photoshop assuming you know the basics. (Tools, layers destructive/nondestructive, crop etc...)
Corel tutorials are a little more beginner friendly.

Gimp, well not much in the way of helpful tutorials. But it is powerful and free.

Portrait Pro, you might as well just use online filters and iphone filters etc...

Feb 23 13 12:38 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Kevin_Connery
Posts: 3,305
Fullerton, California, US


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
What is your opinion on:

1) Gimp?

2) Photoshop?

3) Portrait Professional?

GIMP is a full-featured digital editing tool, with some tools more advanced than what Photoshop offers out of the box, but is missing many features required by a lot of professionals, and has an interface that works best if you think like a programmer and not a photographer/artist. But it certainly can be learned.

Photoshop is a full-featured digital editing tool with a very robust "ecosystem", and is the industry standard. It offers capabilities and functional scaling that no single other product can match.

Portrait Professional is a specialty application which in some ways requires more of an 'eye' to avoid having it do unnatural things for you, but which can be used to good advantage--but almost invariably only by someone who has worked extensively with Photoshop or similar, and/or has a background in art. And for that, it's most often used as a plug-in to Photoshop than as a standalone tool. (Think about it; the ads for it show extremely obviously artificial results: who is their target audience?)

Essentially, you're asking for a comparison between two fruits and one sauce.

Feb 23 13 01:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Orca Bay Images
Posts: 32,233
Lodi, California, US


1) Gimp? Fine, if not overused. It should never be used to compensate for inept photography or to try to make a heinously fugly llama look human.

2) Photoshop? Fine, if not overused. It should never be used to compensate for inept photography or to try to make a heinously fugly llama look human.

3) Portrait Professional? A tool made to be overused by lazy photographers, IMO. Look at its advertising. It takes horribly-photographed llamas with no makeup and tries to make them look reasonably attractive. The ads don't work and most real-world examples I've seen look downright tragic -- like a horrible accident in the spray-tanning booth.
Feb 23 13 01:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 23 13 04:24 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Orca Bay Images
Posts: 32,233
Lodi, California, US


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
I think there are models looks of ones distaste but surely if they were "fugly" they wouldn't have ANY modeling jobs with any business and/or photographers.
But thanks for your take on the subject.

Your naivete is... naive.

Feb 23 13 07:35 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KonstantKarma
Posts: 2,513
Hickory, North Carolina, US


Orca Bay Images wrote:
1) Gimp? Fine, if not overused. It should never be used to compensate for inept photography or to try to make a heinously fugly model look human.

2) Photoshop? Fine, if not overused. It should never be used to compensate for inept photography or to try to make a heinously fugly model look human.

3) Portrait Professional? A tool made to be overused by lazy photographers, IMO. Look at its advertising. It takes horribly-photographed models with no makeup and tries to make them look reasonably attractive. The ads don't work and most real-world examples I've seen look downright tragic -- like a horrible accident in the spray-tanning booth.

^

Feb 23 13 08:00 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Fotografica Gregor
Posts: 4,068
Alexandria, Virginia, US


1 Meh

2 Necessary Evil - prefer to do as much as possible using Nikon Capture and Lightroom

3 Meh
Feb 23 13 08:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Schlake
Posts: 2,341
Socorro, New Mexico, US


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
What is your opinion on:

1) Gimp?

2) Photoshop?

3) Portrait Professional?

Gimp is a program written by some clever people who don't all quite have the expertise of the people from Photoshop, nor even a fraction of the ability to make a usable UI.

Photoshop is good at what it does, and complicated enough that it's like using a CLI instead of a GUI.

Portrait Porfessional is sort of like instagram, but works on pictures that aren't square.

Feb 23 13 08:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Retoucher
Joann Empson
Posts: 430
Walnut Creek, California, US


1) GIMP respects its users' four essential software freedoms.

2) Photoshop violates its users' four essential software freedoms.

3) Portrait Professional violates its users' four essential software freedoms.
Feb 23 13 10:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Cherrystone
Posts: 36,263
Columbus, Ohio, US


Joann Empson wrote:
1) GIMP respects its users' four essential software freedoms.

2) Photoshop violates its users' four essential software freedoms.

3) Portrait Professional violates its users' four essential software freedoms.

Software freedoms? The fuck?????

Feb 25 13 09:00 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Orca Bay Images
Posts: 32,233
Lodi, California, US


Joann Empson wrote:
1) GIMP respects its users' four essential software freedoms.

2) Photoshop violates its users' four essential software freedoms.

3) Portrait Professional violates its users' four essential software freedoms.

I don't need to alter Photoshop's source code to meet my own needs. I don't need to see the source code. And while it would be nice to give away copies of Photoshop to my pals for free, that's wrong on so many levels. People should be able to profit from their work and Adobe put a lot of work into PS. Software developers should have the right of product protection, otherwise they'll go broke and the best software we'll have is GIMP.

Feb 25 13 12:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Smedley Whiplash
Posts: 17,276
Billings, Montana, US


Don't kow about GIMP, but PS is indispensible,

...and the new version of Portrait Professional v11 is pretty damn unbelievable. I dare say that for the average portrait it's awesome, not at full tilt 100% though... you have to use it like you use spice on food: enough to taste both the food and the spice.

But, it depends on what you use it for, and how you use it.
Feb 25 13 12:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Smedley Whiplash
Posts: 17,276
Billings, Montana, US


Orca Bay Images wrote:
3) Portrait Professional? A tool made to be overused by lazy photographers, IMO. Look at its advertising. It takes horribly-photographed models with no makeup and tries to make them look reasonably attractive. The ads don't work and most real-world examples I've seen look downright tragic -- like a horrible accident in the spray-tanning booth.

Lazy?  sheeeesh... more like I'd like to have a life that doesn't consist of spending needless hours at the computer. PP can do in 30 seconds what it would take me 20 minutes or more to do by hand, and the client would likely never appreciate the difference between the two. 

In some respects, their do themselves a disservice with their Ads.  There is no reason to run the programs styles at 100%, which is what the ADs reflect.  I have a recipe that I call "freckles" that eliminates most of the problems, but which leaves freckles in place. That way, I can spend my PS time working on bigger issues then pixel level retouching, something 99% of my clients wouldn't even notice.

That's not to say that pixel level retouching isn't a valuable skill for the right client, but you have use these tools based on the job, not on casting pearls before swine.

Feb 25 13 01:01 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lester Hartness
Posts: 14
Auburn, California, US


In answer to the comment that Photo Pro does weird things to the shape of faces, you can turn that feature off, or adjust it to whatever level you like, just like every other feature of the program. 

And no, I don't have any need to see the source code, or modify it.  I'm not a computer programmer.
Feb 25 13 01:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 25 13 01:20 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Smedley Whiplash
Posts: 17,276
Billings, Montana, US


Kelly Anne-Marie wrote:
I noticed PP does a lot of things on different levels, I just don't know if it's totally a good thing even if you use some sliders at ...15% for instance, PP likes to add a film (if you will) over the finished photo in the background that looks like crap and then needs gimped out.

Sure, but are you referring to the unnatural skin texture that PP generates?

Here's a fix. Are you familiar with the High/Low retouch thread? I'm not sure where it is, but what it essentially does is separate the photo into 4 layers: 
http://www.modelmayhem.com/po.php?thread_id=439098

Hi16
Hi8
Low
background

The intention is to retouch skin color and shading on the Low layer, and pixel level imperfections on either the hi8 or hi16 layers, but....

If you run PP on a copy of the background layer, and then place it like so:

Hi16
Hi8
Portrait Professional layer
Low
background

You get the skin texture/pores of the person back, but without the blemishes, and what little there is left can easily be corrected on the Hi16 layer.

This sample is all at 100%, but you get the idea:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/69377546/PP_sample2.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/69377546/Layer-order.jpg


The intention would then be to mask the PP layer and paint it in as a "time-saver" for such a wicked complexion.

Now here's the same face, but with a neutral complexion, after I've retouched the Hi-16 layer, and painted in some of the masked PP layer (similar to what I would expect from a model without makeup)

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/69377546/PP_sample3.jpg

Feb 25 13 02:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Camerosity
Posts: 5,085
Saint Louis, Missouri, US


a) I’ve never used GIMP, so I can’t give an informed assessment of it. However, I’m very confident that nothing can come close to matching the capabilities of Photoshop.

b) Photoshop is the most capable photo editing software there is – and it has a VERY steep learning curve. After more than a year, there’s still a lot more about Photoshop that I don’t know about it than what I know. For more than a year, I've dedicated every available brain cell to learning Photoshop.

c) I’ll probably get flamed for this, but Portrait Professional has its place – although for me it’s a very limited one. When I use it, it’s for a specific purpose. The first thing I do is turn all the automatic features off and reset all the sliders to zero or 50 – whatever it is that represents “no change” for that specific feature.

If a model has very dark eyes, I can quickly lighten the irises just enough that there’s some color and life in them (although more and more I do this in Photoshop). It’s faster to whiten teeth and darken lips in PPro than in Photoshop – al though I don’t want the software deciding how much to lighten or darken things. A little bit goes a long way.

Sometimes I’ll use PPro to lighten hair overall or to blend splotchy or uneven skin tones a bit (although I'm much more likely to use Imagenomic Portraiture for the latter purpose). If one eye is smaller than the other, sometimes I’ll use it to widen that eye just a little.

For me PPro is just a timesaver for specific tasks As time goes on I use it less and less – and D&B more and more (which is why I often spend three hours or more retouching one photo).

I don’t like blurring, and I’ve been known to spend over an hour dodging and burning one line is a model’s forehead when I could blur it out in a minute or so. I go for weeks without opening PPro.

If I have something like {"Orig Layer") in the photo in the post above mine, I'll reluctantly use Portraiture (before doing anything else except Healing in Photoshop) - and use a layer mask to confine its effects to a limited area of the photo.

If I could just have one retouching tool, Photoshop (and Adobe Camera Raw, which comes with it) would be my first choice, Capture One would be my second – and PPro would be my last.
Feb 25 13 02:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 25 13 05:36 pm  Link  Quote 
Model
Stormee
Posts: 2,463
San Antonio, Texas, US


Feb 25 13 05:41 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers