Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why GIMP Is Better Than Photoshop
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:18:57 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <vlhdrg$1pgeu$2@dont-email.me>
References: <pan$12f0c$b8055f7b$e138cd3a$8c4aa277@linux.rocks>
	<vle9tl$13eiv$3@dont-email.me> <vlerd7$13ci0$4@dont-email.me>
	<vlfbcv$19rah$1@dont-email.me> <vlhdf5$1mvfl$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 21:18:57 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ab784ba7ba6b36eb7fc7c3f5d05b5c3d";
	logging-data="1884638"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+1P9r4ZwXSQsk6Q1rcJD9+"
User-Agent: Pan/0.161 (Chasiv Yar; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:o2tinMakJ33ExRMi3LJmiT2G+Pw=
Bytes: 2743

On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:12:21 -0500, -hh wrote:

> On 1/5/25 8:24 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:51:51 -0500, -hh wrote:
>> 
>>> ... needs to explain how & why it is significant for there to be
>>> floating point at all, since the input sensor is integer based ...
>> 
>> OpenEXR files are commonly used in CG these days, and they have
>> floating- point numbers for each pixel component. They also allow for
>> more than 3-4 pixel components. The values still have their usual
>> meaning, with 0 being full black and 1.0 being full white, but the
>> values are allowed to go outside this range to avoid clipping of
>> dynamic range.
> 
> Dynamic range is why to support more bits, but that's oblique to adding
> more intermediate values by using floating point instead of integer.

That, too, seems to be important to them. You’d think single-precision 
floats would be enough, but no, they want the option for double-precision 
as well.

>> GIMP’s GEGL pixel engine deals natively with such things. Photoshop
>> needs to use import/export filters which inevitably lose quality.
> 
> But isn't integral vs modular just a software architectural design
> choice?

The limiting factor is what the native pixel engine can handle. And 
Photoshop’s one is pretty limited compared to GEGL.

>> This is probably why Adobe products are not used much in VFX work.
> 
> Adobe's product here is probably After Effects, and it supports formats
> such as ProRes, where the originals are integer 10 or 12 bits/channel.

But it’s not a node-based compositor, is it? Even Blender can do better 
than that.