Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GIMP Resynth vs. Photoshop Content Aware

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the in-this-corner dept.

aylons writes "Just after Adobe released videos showing off the content-aware feature of Photoshop CS5, the GIMP community answered by showing the resynthesizer plugin, which has been available for some time and can do a similar job. However, are they really comparable? (In original Portuguese, but really, the images are pretty much self-explaining.) Compare them side by side removing the same objects from different kinds of images. Results do vary, but the most interesting part may be seeing the different results and trying to understand the logic of each algorithm."

14 of 269 comments (clear)

  1. I'm sure... by AcquaCow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I saw that site a few weeks ago when folks were going gaga over PS's "new" feature (GIMP Resynth has been around for a few years now)...

    I'm sure Adobe has seen it, I'm sure Adobe took the time to try and make theirs better.

    The question is the Adobe implementation worth the cost of PS, or is the GIMP plugin "Good enough"

    That really comes down to the consumer though. I think it is "Good enough" for my needs...I can easily touch-up anything it does that I disagree with.

      -- Dave

    --

    up 12 days, 22:30, 2 users, load averages: 993.20, 994.21, 994.56
    *makes note to limit user processes...
    1. Re:I'm sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Wait till you hear from pseudo-professionals who would trash GIMP at any given opportunity. Clearly, GIMP was ahead of PS on this so called revolutionary concept, but nobody made a big fuss about it. And then hell broke loose when PS announced it - the earlier thread on it was full of multiple orgasms by the same 'professionals'.

    2. Re:I'm sure... by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Informative

      > I even know it exists, what it's called, where it's website is, and I still have no idea how to download or install it.

      I use Ubuntu. There was a package for it. All I had to do was run apt-get.

      This is probably just a "script" and can be dropped into the appropriate place if you don't have a proper package.

      Plenty of PS stuff exists as plugins. Does that mean they don't exist either?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:I'm sure... by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bingo, we're into Drake Equation territory here.

      Hell, even if you do know about it, good luck actually using it. After 15 minutes of apt-get fiddling and chanting mantras, I'm still unable to get the damn thing working in GIMP 2.6.7. For a feature whose primary purpose is to save you time, it sure could do with an FONT OF GOD sized install guide that explains how to (actually) get it working.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    4. Re:I'm sure... by Alphathon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the main problem most "pseudo-professionals" have with GIMP is familiarity. I myself use OpenOffice.org regularly and the transition from Microsoft Office was extremely simple - download it and start using it. The same is not true of GIMP since it's UI is so different than Photoshops. These "pseudo-professionals", almost certainly have a long history with Photoshop, so understand how to do things using it's UI, but likely don't even know where to start with GIMP and write it off as useless. It is closed minded, but certainly understandable on a professional/semi-professional level. Blender seems to suffer the same problem, since it's UI is vastly different than any other 3D program I've tried (although since there are more available than in the photo-editing world no one program has a "monopoly" on the UI so it's not quite as bed).

      Most FOSS doesn't tend to have this problem because it either does a specific task that has no industry standard UI, Emulates the industry standard UI (like OpenOffice.org) or is so simple that it makes little difference how the UI is designed as long as it works (things like 7-zip for example - its function is to open and create archives. You don't have 100s of filters and tools to use so everything can be put into a couple of menus and not be confusing).

    5. Re:I'm sure... by geordie_loz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Look, it's clearly a case of the open source community failing to innovate and just copying the competition. They're getting so desperate now that they even resorting to copying features from propriety software a couple of years before they appear..

    6. Re:I'm sure... by Daengbo · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's in the AUR as a package for Arch. I don't even use Arch and it took me thirty seconds to find this. It's the very first page when you Google for "arch linux resynthesizer." You want to be 1337 "cause I use Arch?" Learn to Google.

      --
      Put identity in the browser.
    7. Re:I'm sure... by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 5, Informative

      I installed it pretty easy under Ubuntu (9.10):
      $ sudo apt-get install gimp-resynthesizer
      However, when I first tried using it, I was using the Filter->Map->Resynthesize... menu option which kind of works, but isn't so great. I had to google to find a good explanation of how to use it. What you should do is:
      1. Install as above,
      2. Select area of image to remove,
      3. Use Filters->Enhance->Smart remove selection...

      And to be clear about this - it is fucking awesome. Seriously! I'm not usually _that_ impressed with things (I'm far too old!), but this goes into total witch-craft territory, it is *that* good!

      If anyone has managed to install this plugin under Windows, I'd like to know the instructions for doing so (not for me... it's for my *friends*... honest!!!).

    8. Re:I'm sure... by arose · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Maybe once they straighten out their UI issues it'll get better. GIMP has been around seemingly forever - people have criticized the UI from the start, and it's STILL never been addressed.

      People will find a new pet issue to criticize. What most of them really mean is "I don't care, I don't want to try anything new", but that doesn't sound good, so they will always find a new issue as long as GIMP isn't a carbon copy of the latest version of Photoshop. For the record, there are no serious UI issues beyond it being unfamiliar, there is a ton of minor ones, but to see them you actually have to spend some time with the program, so unsurprisingly they are not the target of much criticism.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  2. The real questions have already been answered by AUSman · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://thedailywh.at/post/522085228/photoshop-cs5s-content-aware-fill-not-good

  3. Re:The real questions have already been answered by cc1984_ · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was going to say this is NSFW, but on closer inspection, I just don't know what to say.

  4. Plugin vs built-in by gaspyy · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can't speak for everyone who uses PS and/or Gimp, just for myself.

    The real news was not the ability to do this kind of interpolation, but the fact that's built-in and integrated in the workflow.
    For Photoshop, Alien Skin Image Doctor has been available for years (2002 maybe). What matters for me is that I no longer need to use a plugin and I can use this smart fills in several scenarios, including as a brush to remove fine things like wires.

    The same goes with another new feature in PS CS5, the new selection tools. There were at least 2 or 3 plugins (like Fluid Mask) that could do tricky selections, but now it's built-in.
    Same with the new lens corrections, no need for PTLens anymore, I can even profile my own lenses using the new lens profile creator from the labs.

    I don't want to sound like I'm defending Adobe here, I used to hate them. For 10 years I've been using Corel Photo-Paint (from v3 to X3) plus a few others including The Gimp. In the end I realized that despite its shortcomings, PS really is the best tool for the job. When you're under pressure to deliver, small differences add up.

  5. Re:Moot point by MrHanky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the 'prosumers' I've seen dismiss Gimp just repeat stuff they've read on Slashdot, knowing that it makes them look +5, insightful. They're probably as lazy when it comes to learning new tools as they are when it comes to independent thought.

  6. Re:Even so... by camg188 · · Score: 4, Informative

    But the review was from a pro-Linux site, so fairness isn't something I should have expected.

    Why do you think it was a pro-Linux site? Just because one of the sample pictures had toy penguins in it?
    I looked at the first 5 pages of the site and it was mostly articles about Windows OS and Windows graphics applications with a few stories about Apple stuff and Twitter. Not a single article about Linux.