Web-Based Photo Editor Roundup

mikemuch writes "ExtremeTech has a roundup of 5 web-based image editing programs. The mostly Flash and AJAX-based webware ranges from simple touch-up services like Snipshot to the Photoshop wannabe Fauxto. They vary greatly in interface and extra goodies; some offer bookmarklets for getting images from a web page you're browsing, some offer artistic or goofy effects for you pix, but all fear the specter of Adobe's online version of Photoshop on the horizon."

Comments

Re:As...

[fyngyrz]

Flamebait, eh? I suppose I deserved that. A lot of people think the Gimp is comparable to big gun programs because they're just not familiar with the kinds of things they can do with more powerful systems. So here's a more direct response that makes the point with workflow.

Here's what I want to do, a workflow that takes about three to five minutes in my software. By all means, tell me how to do it using the Gimp, which I of course have a copy of:

I want to take this image I have of a face, and I want to move three separate water-impact effects across it arbitrarily, watching how the waves interact with each other live, so I can catch the exact point where the effect is perfect. I don't want this effect on the image though, the image must remain untouched - so it can only show on the final composite image. I accomplish this easily by creating each water effect in its own geometric distortion layer above the face layer and subsequently prodding the layers around position-wise. Now I want to morph the shape of the image's eyes to match those of another face. There's a tool for that; I just do it, takes about 30 seconds. A little masking, and the new eyes overlay the originals. Next, I want a live particle system attached to a pin on the chest. I'll take an additive fireworks display and lava flow, and I also want a ray-traced diamond (brilliant-cut) on the pin, spinning in 3d, reflecting and refracting the particle system through the gem. Again, I want to see this live so I can pick the still I prefer from the stream, and the original image must remain untouched. Next, I want a trail of ants around the edge of the image; I'll apply these with a brush, and as I drag the brush around, the ants rotate to follow the brush as if they were following a trail of bread-crumbs, they lay down shadows, randomly reposition, resize and flip so as to create a "community" of ants all more-or-less following a trail. They look very, very real, though they are made from a single brush. Now I want to color key out the background on the main image, because I want to underlay a different backdrop. We can't disturb any of the effects, though, or change the image's actual transparency; the color key itself must also be a non-destructive layer effect. Now that the new backdrop has been underlaid, I'll move this to CMYK space (still without affecting the original in any way), mix UCR and GCR techniques to match my printer's best press results, and generate fully prepress ready plates. The image is now a stack of layered effects on top of the original face, with the exception of the backdrop, which is lower in the stack than the face. The face was never touched during the entire process, and so every effect and change can be keyed on or off by simply turning layer controls on or off, or using layer effect levels to mute or enhance the effects. The individual layers are all viewable at the same time, separate from one another, each in their own window, and at the same time as the composite master image which contains the final result. All layers and effects are still live, editable, undoable, and so on.

On seeing the results, my client wants the eyes returned to normal, and he wants an emerald in the pin, muttering something mostly incomprehensible about "blood diamonds" and "hollywood." So I click off (disable) the morph layer, change the materials refraction of the stone to that of emerald and the cut as well, re-generate the 3d object into a new layer (I'm keeping the diamond hidden in its own disabled layer in case they change their minds again, unpredictable finks that they are), republish the plates, and I'm done. Total additional time, about 30 seconds.

For a point of reference, I can do this entire process considerably faster than I was able to type a description of it, everything is built-in and ready to go, what is required of me is simply area selection, slider adjustments and so on; so that's the kind of performance I'm looking for from the Gimp. So. Taking the claim that the Gimp is just as capable at face value, how do I get this workflow working in the Gimp into under, say, five minutes? Over to you.

Re:As...

[fyngyrz]

You insist that a $30 piece of software can do consumer level photo editing better than the GIMP can.

Yes, I do claim precisely that. Can the Gimp non-destructively rotate a torn image fragment back into frame such that it can be readjusted later as required? Hmmm? Can it mix said rotation with other geometrics, such as putting a "clown nose" on a picture, yet not putting it on the picture? And still un-rotate the image underneath the nose effect? Live, of course? Can the Gimp do CMYK separations for a pro print of your photo? Can the Gimp manage over 70 different layer modes including non-destructive geometric (and other) effects? Can the Gimp switch between pre-select and post-select for speed? Can the Gimp consistently remove zits and pimples and furrows with exactly one mouse operation (drag, release) per blemish? All of this on consumer photos, of course. And all of it really fast and clean. Does the Gimp offer a custom toolbox/caddy of whatever you like for your current operating habits, such as photo editing, heightfield work, compositing, texture generation? Does the Gimp let me apply splined animation of area selections in real-time so I can track a lightning bolt across dad's bald head coming from mom's outstretched finger? What, you expect me to apologize because we can also do pro-level compositing and fx? Help me out here. You're a funny person. I like you. Even if you do post AC. Don't worry, I always read at -1. :-)