Thursday, April 15, 2010
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
A Look at Gimp
The three hour pre-conference session I did on Gimp, the open source alternative software to programs like Photoshop, gave me a good opportunity to get to know it. I am a died in the wool Photoshop guy, with an Adobe certification in Photoshop and over 10 years experience using the tool for the web as well as print design work. The graphic artist in me wanted to immediately shoot down this tool as just another poser trying to do things it has no business doing.
But I was wrong about Gimp for several reasons. First, Gimp was never designed as a direct competitor with Photoshop. It can do some of the same things (quite well), but it is a free editor. It is also far more specific in its design than Photoshop (which can be a good thing as well) and, most importantly, it does quite well head to head against Photoshop anyway, considering it is FREE!!
Since I am evaluating this tool as something that can be used to teach image editing in schools, my background in graphic design continually crept in to the evaluation process. It is nice enough to teach students how to use a tool (any tool) but one of the things that has always bugged me about schools is that they continually try to foist off inadequate tools that they got for a dime on students and parents by saying "It's just like" a certain program (I am staring with complete disapproval at YOU, Microsoft FrontPage/Expression Web). When in reality, they are absolutely NOT something that would EVER be used in a professional environment for quality output.
Let's face it. There is a REASON that Photoshop is the standard for professional image editing. There really just isn't anything better out there. So don't tell me there is. But having worked in higher education as an instructor as well as sys admin, I was constantly bombarded with how "good" certain totally inadequate tools were. Either because the school didn't want to pony up the cash for the real tools or because they were in bed with certain software companies and agreed to only use their (completely useless) products and force them on the teachers and students. All the while wondering why their students were getting degrees but not getting hired. Yet local companies were telling them constantly that they were teaching on crapplications that would never be used.
This trickles down in to high schools and even middle schools as well. I have been very disappointed to hear about business programs, art programs or yearbooks that are trying to teach students image editing on some woefully inadequate program like PrintShop. GAH!! Why bother? You are not teaching ANYTHING useful at that point. Move on to something else.
Anyway, sorry for the rant, but it leads me to my current research on Gimp.
I was introduced to this tool last year. I downloaded it, played with it and then subsequently forgot all about it until I started teaching Photoshop to the teacher in the state of Missouri. Inevitably, talk would turn to money and faces would fall when teachers were told how much Photoshop actually cost. Most schools, even with deep educational discounts, just can't afford to fill a lab with fully licensed copies of Photoshop. I completely understand. So many of them asked what else could be used? I went back and started looking at Gimp again, and I liked what I saw!
Let's talk Gimp for a second...
First of all, get out of your head that Gimp is anywhere NEAR as powerful as Photoshop. It is MAYBE 50-60% of Photoshop as far as functionality. But! This is a GOOD THING!! Look, I'm Adobe certified in Photoshop and I will admit to knowing no more than about 80% of what the program can do. It's just that big!
What you get with Gimp is the 50% that you NEED to do a basic job, without all the millions of other things (3D capability, anyone?) that just get in the way or become a distraction when you are trying to learn not only the tool, but the process as well.
This does not, however, mean that you are "feature poor" if you choose to use Gimp. It has plenty of tools for manipulating and enhancing images that are on a par with Photoshop. And the best thing is, most of them walk and talk just like the Photoshop tools (although some have slightly different names and behaviors). This is also a good thing. It allows you to learn the techniques with windows, terminology and processes that are parallel to Photoshop. This, for schools, means that if a student is taught the proper technique for editing color in an image in Gimp, it is simply a matter of learning where to go in Photoshop to get that dialogue box to open (Levels, for example). After that, it is pretty much the same. This is a critically important point in favor of Gimp as a teaching tool.
The tools, although named slightly differently than the Photoshop tools, all work pretty much the same way. There are a few different tools in Gimp, but the basics are all there. Learn to use them in Gimp and you know how to use them in Photoshop.
When I teach my Photoshop classes, I emphasize that the tool can be broken down into two basic and critical phases. Making selections and working with layers. If you can master these two areas in Photoshop, it becomes an easy tool to work with. This idea transfers seamlessly to Gimp. Both work exactly the same way. If for no other reason, when a school is considering what tool to teach (and Photoshop is not an option), I would recommend using Gimp over any other tool just because of it's Photoshop-esque way of handling selections and layers.
Gimp does have a few critcal holes that need to be filled. The largest one is the lack of a "Save For Web" feature. This is easily remedied by downloading a plug in by that name from the large plug in library created for the tool. Other than that, it works right out of the box and seems pretty stable. It is also not nearly the resource hog that Photoshop is so it can be used effectively on older or less powerful computers.
I have not had the opportunity to analyze the output of this tool in the print environment. Nor have I had the chance to talk to an offset press company about using Gimp files. My guess is that, since Gimp still uses bitmap text, it is NOT recommended that you use the text tools in Gimp for offset press work. The text will come out grainy and just not look like you want. I have, however, saved several files for the web and uploaded them side by side with Photoshop images and only start to see slight quality differences between them at very low JPG settings (the Photoshop images are better). But most of the time this just isn't an issue. it is rare that you would need to set your JPG quality at 40 or less and this is where differences start to show up. No biggie.
To conclude my rambling rant...
Gimp is a GREAT tool. It will certainly do a critical, two-fold job for schools. First, it is a great, NO COST alternative to Photoshop for schools to use when manipulating images for websites, print media, etc. Second, it is a high quality tool for TEACHING image editing due to its similarity in form and function to the venerable Photoshop. And if/when students ever do step up to Photoshop, the transition will be smooth and (relatively) painless...!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=dc6d36f2-453f-4acc-bfd0-18a4d39e22dc)
But I was wrong about Gimp for several reasons. First, Gimp was never designed as a direct competitor with Photoshop. It can do some of the same things (quite well), but it is a free editor. It is also far more specific in its design than Photoshop (which can be a good thing as well) and, most importantly, it does quite well head to head against Photoshop anyway, considering it is FREE!!
Since I am evaluating this tool as something that can be used to teach image editing in schools, my background in graphic design continually crept in to the evaluation process. It is nice enough to teach students how to use a tool (any tool) but one of the things that has always bugged me about schools is that they continually try to foist off inadequate tools that they got for a dime on students and parents by saying "It's just like" a certain program (I am staring with complete disapproval at YOU, Microsoft FrontPage/Expression Web). When in reality, they are absolutely NOT something that would EVER be used in a professional environment for quality output.
Let's face it. There is a REASON that Photoshop is the standard for professional image editing. There really just isn't anything better out there. So don't tell me there is. But having worked in higher education as an instructor as well as sys admin, I was constantly bombarded with how "good" certain totally inadequate tools were. Either because the school didn't want to pony up the cash for the real tools or because they were in bed with certain software companies and agreed to only use their (completely useless) products and force them on the teachers and students. All the while wondering why their students were getting degrees but not getting hired. Yet local companies were telling them constantly that they were teaching on crapplications that would never be used.
This trickles down in to high schools and even middle schools as well. I have been very disappointed to hear about business programs, art programs or yearbooks that are trying to teach students image editing on some woefully inadequate program like PrintShop. GAH!! Why bother? You are not teaching ANYTHING useful at that point. Move on to something else.
Anyway, sorry for the rant, but it leads me to my current research on Gimp.
I was introduced to this tool last year. I downloaded it, played with it and then subsequently forgot all about it until I started teaching Photoshop to the teacher in the state of Missouri. Inevitably, talk would turn to money and faces would fall when teachers were told how much Photoshop actually cost. Most schools, even with deep educational discounts, just can't afford to fill a lab with fully licensed copies of Photoshop. I completely understand. So many of them asked what else could be used? I went back and started looking at Gimp again, and I liked what I saw!
Let's talk Gimp for a second...
First of all, get out of your head that Gimp is anywhere NEAR as powerful as Photoshop. It is MAYBE 50-60% of Photoshop as far as functionality. But! This is a GOOD THING!! Look, I'm Adobe certified in Photoshop and I will admit to knowing no more than about 80% of what the program can do. It's just that big!
What you get with Gimp is the 50% that you NEED to do a basic job, without all the millions of other things (3D capability, anyone?) that just get in the way or become a distraction when you are trying to learn not only the tool, but the process as well.
This does not, however, mean that you are "feature poor" if you choose to use Gimp. It has plenty of tools for manipulating and enhancing images that are on a par with Photoshop. And the best thing is, most of them walk and talk just like the Photoshop tools (although some have slightly different names and behaviors). This is also a good thing. It allows you to learn the techniques with windows, terminology and processes that are parallel to Photoshop. This, for schools, means that if a student is taught the proper technique for editing color in an image in Gimp, it is simply a matter of learning where to go in Photoshop to get that dialogue box to open (Levels, for example). After that, it is pretty much the same. This is a critically important point in favor of Gimp as a teaching tool.
The tools, although named slightly differently than the Photoshop tools, all work pretty much the same way. There are a few different tools in Gimp, but the basics are all there. Learn to use them in Gimp and you know how to use them in Photoshop.
When I teach my Photoshop classes, I emphasize that the tool can be broken down into two basic and critical phases. Making selections and working with layers. If you can master these two areas in Photoshop, it becomes an easy tool to work with. This idea transfers seamlessly to Gimp. Both work exactly the same way. If for no other reason, when a school is considering what tool to teach (and Photoshop is not an option), I would recommend using Gimp over any other tool just because of it's Photoshop-esque way of handling selections and layers.
Gimp does have a few critcal holes that need to be filled. The largest one is the lack of a "Save For Web" feature. This is easily remedied by downloading a plug in by that name from the large plug in library created for the tool. Other than that, it works right out of the box and seems pretty stable. It is also not nearly the resource hog that Photoshop is so it can be used effectively on older or less powerful computers.
I have not had the opportunity to analyze the output of this tool in the print environment. Nor have I had the chance to talk to an offset press company about using Gimp files. My guess is that, since Gimp still uses bitmap text, it is NOT recommended that you use the text tools in Gimp for offset press work. The text will come out grainy and just not look like you want. I have, however, saved several files for the web and uploaded them side by side with Photoshop images and only start to see slight quality differences between them at very low JPG settings (the Photoshop images are better). But most of the time this just isn't an issue. it is rare that you would need to set your JPG quality at 40 or less and this is where differences start to show up. No biggie.
To conclude my rambling rant...
Gimp is a GREAT tool. It will certainly do a critical, two-fold job for schools. First, it is a great, NO COST alternative to Photoshop for schools to use when manipulating images for websites, print media, etc. Second, it is a high quality tool for TEACHING image editing due to its similarity in form and function to the venerable Photoshop. And if/when students ever do step up to Photoshop, the transition will be smooth and (relatively) painless...!
Friday, October 9, 2009
Posterous
As I spend more and more time online in the world of Web 2.0, I find myself looking for more ways to streamline my communications. I realize that not everyone is buried as deeply as I am and that some people only use one tool for communication. But since part of my job is to teach a wide variety of educators in a wide variety of settings, not all of them are using the same tools. This puts me in a dilemma. How do I reach them all in as few a steps as possible? It would be ridiculous of me to think that I could keep up with all the tools and repeat myself on every platform just to cover as many people as possible. So how do I make sure to spread my information with as broad a brush as possible, thus saving myself hours of repetitive posts to different tools?
Enter Posterous. I had read about Posterous in the early spring but had dismissed it as just another tool. My cursory glance at it had given it poor marks for user friendliness, average marks as a tool, and I think I just failed to see what it was designed for. To me, it really just appeared to be a way to email or phone in your blog entries. Then I began communicating on a larger and larger number of platforms (Twitter, Facebook, FriendFeed, Plurk, blogs, etc.) and thought "there has got to be an easier way".
This is where Posterous shines. A blog post sometime during the early summer encouraged me to go back and take another look at this tool. Although (at the time) it had no themes available to personalize the blogs it created, what I found was the incredibly useful tools it offers on the back side.
What it does:
I'm sure Posterous has other features, but frankly, I don't care. This is the one feature I need and it sold me on the tool completely. Since I started using Posterous to update my personal blog (not this one, my original blog at http://dabigleap.wordpress.com), Facebook, Twitter, Friendfeed, Plurk, etc. I rarely ever even go to some of them (especially Wordpress) anymore. I don't need to. If you are looking for a tool to streamline the communication process, give Posterous a try. Oh... and they have a few themes now too!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=770dd4a2-27c7-4adc-b829-5308579f48eb)
Enter Posterous. I had read about Posterous in the early spring but had dismissed it as just another tool. My cursory glance at it had given it poor marks for user friendliness, average marks as a tool, and I think I just failed to see what it was designed for. To me, it really just appeared to be a way to email or phone in your blog entries. Then I began communicating on a larger and larger number of platforms (Twitter, Facebook, FriendFeed, Plurk, blogs, etc.) and thought "there has got to be an easier way".
This is where Posterous shines. A blog post sometime during the early summer encouraged me to go back and take another look at this tool. Although (at the time) it had no themes available to personalize the blogs it created, what I found was the incredibly useful tools it offers on the back side.
What it does:
- Post to your blog through email
- Post to MULTIPLE PLATFORMS IN ONE CLICK
- Group and organize blog posts
- Create easy slide shows of images
- Manage just about EVERY other service through one portal.
I'm sure Posterous has other features, but frankly, I don't care. This is the one feature I need and it sold me on the tool completely. Since I started using Posterous to update my personal blog (not this one, my original blog at http://dabigleap.wordpress.com), Facebook, Twitter, Friendfeed, Plurk, etc. I rarely ever even go to some of them (especially Wordpress) anymore. I don't need to. If you are looking for a tool to streamline the communication process, give Posterous a try. Oh... and they have a few themes now too!
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Getting Up To Speed
Got tons to talk about so let's get started!
First and foremost, I am a Googlemaniac. I am a strong supporter/fan of all things Google does (with the notable exception of Presentations, which, frankly, needs help). From my Google brain right down to my Google socks (like these, sported by Dean Shareski, only red),
I have found little to be disappointed with. Except for my obvious disappointment with the obvious "dis" I got by not getting ONE invitation to Google Wave. ...and after everything I've done for them... *sigh*
Anyway, pouting and pity parties aside, I am in the process of putting together NUMEROUS conference presentations (read: drowning in my own blood, meaning I chose this path). One of them is on "Stuff Management". I am talking about organizational tools for Web 2.0. One of my favorites (it's my homepage in all browsers) is iGoogle. This awesome tool went completely under my radar for several months after it came out, thanks to Google's complete and total LACK of advertising/marketing about any of the cool tools they have. This isn't a complaint, I just find it funny that a company with so many amazing resources seems to just release them into the wild with little more fanfare than a simple press release. You know... "Oh yeah... Here's this thing... it's called Google Wave. No biggie. Here ya go. Play with it. It's only going to REVOLUTIONIZE THE WAY WE COMMUNICATE..." Ok... That last part was mine, but still.
The reason I say this is that I completely STUMBLED ONTO iGoogle. In fact, if it hadn't been for a very sensitive touchpad on my laptop, I probably would never have accidentally fallen into the tool at all! Now I can't live without it.
There are hundreds to perhaps thousands of widgets that you add to your page (and it's unbelievably easy to add stuff and move it around). Then with a little simple configuration, you have one spot to monitor like a big Web 2.0 dashboard. For teachers and librarians, there are also weather widgets, pictures of the day, words of the day, and many other useful little widgets for your daily consumption.
I haven't shown this to one person who didn't immediately run out and try it. Most of them stuck with it and now, like me, can't live without. Lessee... Easy, effective, flexible, useful, low bandwidth, efficient... I could go on...?
Find it at http://www.google.com/ig
Image Credit: Shareski via Flickr
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=a024bcb1-2d00-47a7-bc5f-564a5968bb95)
First and foremost, I am a Googlemaniac. I am a strong supporter/fan of all things Google does (with the notable exception of Presentations, which, frankly, needs help). From my Google brain right down to my Google socks (like these, sported by Dean Shareski, only red),
I have found little to be disappointed with. Except for my obvious disappointment with the obvious "dis" I got by not getting ONE invitation to Google Wave. ...and after everything I've done for them... *sigh*Anyway, pouting and pity parties aside, I am in the process of putting together NUMEROUS conference presentations (read: drowning in my own blood, meaning I chose this path). One of them is on "Stuff Management". I am talking about organizational tools for Web 2.0. One of my favorites (it's my homepage in all browsers) is iGoogle. This awesome tool went completely under my radar for several months after it came out, thanks to Google's complete and total LACK of advertising/marketing about any of the cool tools they have. This isn't a complaint, I just find it funny that a company with so many amazing resources seems to just release them into the wild with little more fanfare than a simple press release. You know... "Oh yeah... Here's this thing... it's called Google Wave. No biggie. Here ya go. Play with it. It's only going to REVOLUTIONIZE THE WAY WE COMMUNICATE..." Ok... That last part was mine, but still.
The reason I say this is that I completely STUMBLED ONTO iGoogle. In fact, if it hadn't been for a very sensitive touchpad on my laptop, I probably would never have accidentally fallen into the tool at all! Now I can't live without it.
Image via CrunchBase
There are hundreds to perhaps thousands of widgets that you add to your page (and it's unbelievably easy to add stuff and move it around). Then with a little simple configuration, you have one spot to monitor like a big Web 2.0 dashboard. For teachers and librarians, there are also weather widgets, pictures of the day, words of the day, and many other useful little widgets for your daily consumption.
I haven't shown this to one person who didn't immediately run out and try it. Most of them stuck with it and now, like me, can't live without. Lessee... Easy, effective, flexible, useful, low bandwidth, efficient... I could go on...?
Find it at http://www.google.com/ig
Image Credit: Shareski via Flickr
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Let's Get This Going
Just what I need. ANOTHER blog. But no matter. This is important stuff and I need some way to test all the goodies out there in the Web 2.0 world. With such a huge number of tools on the board AND with the unbelievable amount of interconnectivity (is that a word... can I say that?) between tools, I need someplace to test it all. Blogger seems a bit more friendly when it comes to that stuff and all this Education Technology stuff wouldn't make much sense on my triathlon/running training blog... now would it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
