Slashdot Mirror


GIMP Resynth vs. Photoshop Content Aware

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."

6 of 269 comments (clear)

  1. The real questions have already been answered by AUSman · · Score: 5, Funny
  2. 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'.

  3. 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).

  4. 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..

  5. 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.

  6. 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!!!).