Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Work and fun (Score 1) 1880

Incidentally, this is why Windows is the best platform for photo editing: once you step out of the undemanding use, and need GPGPU and 64-bit support, you use the platform that had both of them first: "PC" as most artists would call it. 3rd party plug in library is bigger too. Try and explain that to most photographers or artists and you will first get an reflex snort, then silence, then "but I like Mac" with a laugh(photogs) or a whine (artists). Idiots.

Comment Re:Work and fun (Score 1) 1880

CMYK is pretty important to people that actually send jobs to printers for flyers, brochures, marketing materials, etc.

True, but if you are doing that, then you are probably, well, making money from Photoshop, like the previous poster said.

There seems to be this strange mindset with the Gimp developer community that RGB is the only game in town

It's not so much that as it is that there are issues with licensing and patents, especially regarding Pantone.

Glad to see you agree; GIMP isn't a replacement for Photoshop, it's a replacement for Elements.

The problem is that people use Photoshop, a complete and mature set of editing tools designed for people who know what a wratten number is (which is why I've never needed a photoshop class/book, though I've no doubt I would benefit from one), often used at levels between Elements and MS Paint. And that is the user the GIMP developers code for. And the reason otherwise bright people claim that GIMP is a replacement for Photoshop; they conflate poor use of software with the software itself.

There are pieces in my (well, one) fine art portfolio that one simply can't make in GIMP. Claiming that it's "limitless" (not directed at parent - he sounds like he knows what he's talking about) is intellectually dishonest. I would love real competition for Adobe, but alas.

Comment Re:Answers Explained (Score 1) 543

My main desktop has 24GB; my home away from home one has 12GB and it's painful.

I don't think you realize how demanding certain tasks are - my Photoshop CS5 process is usually idling at 15GB. I actually put some composited art pieces on the backburner because they simply weren't possible, even with working with collapsed layer copies - the free transforms necessary to do certain stitchess (often freehand because I often value human perception over "properly" corrected edge convergence) simply caused CS5x64 to die in seconds on my i7/6GB setup. 24GB - and give me 240, I'll use it - was the difference between having something in my head and something complete. And that was merely 10,500x3,700/16-bit but was made of 15 (20+MP/16-bit) images selectively mixed plus an hour or two of clone painting. True story: when I installed Adobe Lightroom 3 (an image colection manager) I realized that it switched the "Open in Photoshop" link to the 32 bit version... after I simply tried to open a flattened, preprint image four or five times and failed with RAM errors. I had just moved up from 6GB, so I was still used to seeing those errors, so I sat there reclicking a few times like an idiot... before it clicked.

An 80MP back only costs $30,000 - as a capital cost for fashion and product photography, that's nothing. 165MB a shot. Some people put these on large format cameras and slide them across a frame taking 20+ images to recombine later.

Film scans are huge, especially when oversampled for archival purposes. Scans are not done in black and white, and may have a 4th (RGB+IR) channel. Migrant Mother and the rest of Lange's WPA work? 4x5 (inches). Most of Ansel Adams? 8x10. At a recent camera industry show, one custom large format camera maker described a recent commission to build a 20x24 vacuum back (to prevent film from buckling, making an irregularly curved imaging plane). When I asked why (emulsion coated) glass plates weren't used (like they were in astrophotography for decades after they were "obsolete" to maintain critical even field sharpness) he answered - it doesn't scan well. I can only image that guy's headaches.

Imaging is everywhere, and the nominal file sizes are just the start - transforms and layers start multiplying sizes very quickly. Why shouldn't a doctor be able to pull a 10,000 slice axial scan and compare it to not only that patient's previous 20 scans (say 5 years, every three months) but the historical scans of 50 other patients, perhaps scaled and superimposed. Might not be rigorous enough for a study, but back of the envelope experiments lead to the sometimes pivotal "huh, that's funny" moments. Sometimes you need a big envelope.

In turn, imaging is just a specialized case of sampling, and that is present in just about every industry job that requires book learning. Of all people, shouldn't computer industry (dev and admin alike) people be able to think (in terms of use cases and) of uses cases other than: mom, secretary =2GB, server =16GB+? The list above (and I don't mean to pick on you; rather industry myopia) boils down to age and size of data consuming device, a nod to "high end workstations," and servers. That reads like PC Magazine, c. 1990. Well, workstations have outstripped the needs of most servers long ago - servers get virtualized into a reduced number of machines/cpus, while workstations, once they run out of space for more cpus/gpus/asics start getting expanded into clusters, then renderfarms. I understand how this can be nipicked, but my point is, intensive endusers -those in information creation and manipulation- are not just a massive GFLOPS long tail, but that quantity can be a qualitative change for these users that leads to new modes of thinking. It's one thing to run up against a memory limit; it's another to add extra dimentionality to your techniques because "your brain is now bigger." Thing is, when the tool user isn't the tool maker, these unseen limits may not be perceived as such - they dont realize what they need.

Comment VERY interesting study in linguistics (Score 0) 31

Esperanto failed because it was artificial, created from theories on language that were popular at the time and not created naturally out of actual human communication. I'd think that any serious attempt to use Klingon as a REAL language would fail for the same reason. However, we have in this child's brain a language generation machine. It's possible that he "fixes" the Klingon language, turning it into a true human language worthy of serious study. God knows that Chomsky would have done to get to study this child (and father).

(F.Y.I - In reality, I seriously object to experimenting on children this way. It is really interesting though.)

Comment Re:or we start treating it like a war (Score 3, Insightful) 627

or we start treating it like a war
instead of a police action

It would be a lot easier to treat what is going on in Iraq or Afghanistan like a war instead of a police action if they were actions conducted between states with distinct geographic bases rather than an efforts to suppress the elements of populations which are dissatisfied to the point of violence with the regimes established over the regions in which those populations exists.

I doubt we could have won WW2 under the rules we use now

Yes, its generally difficult to win an interstate war if you treat it as a counterinsurgency action. Of course, the reverse is also true. Applying the methods used to win WW2 to the operations in Afghanistan or Iraq wouldn't end the insurgency in either place.

Comment Re:Don't forget Paint.NET (Score 1) 900

...AND it would promote the .NET platform to a wider audience who might then be more willing to try other .NET apps after having a good experience with Paint.NET.

If they know what that means. Everybody that I tell about the software is intially confused.

Me: "It's called Paint.NET."
Them: "Oh, so www..."
Me: "No, sorry, it's not a website. It's a program you install."
Them: "What?"
Me: "It's built on a thing called the .NET platform, and I don't know why they included that in the name."
Them: "Oh."
Me: "But it's really good!"

Comment GIMP's stupid name (Score 5, Insightful) 900

GIMP isn't ready for serious users because its called GIMP.

I'm not familiar with the negative association you mention, but I do have a negative association with the word "Gimp": it's slang for a crippled person. Just what I need: software that hobbles along!

One thing that Linux seriously needs to get over is the need to name everything with acronyms. Mozilla didn't call their browser the Standard Link-browsing Universal Gui, because SLUG is a horrible name for a browser. And GIMP is a horrible name for... well, anything.

Then the icon is this crazed badger or something. I'm confused from the get-go.

The complete lack of marketing savvy is one thing that gives Linux the "not ready for prime time" public image. At least Ubuntu makes software that doesn't scare people.

Comment Re:Where does this leave GIMP? (Score 1) 900

Easy to say, easy to Prove? I'm not convinced. I work with Artists, and Graphic Artists at a national graphics company. These artists beat the drum for anything Adobe, but in a AS3 program, you can't import an *.AI, *.EPS, or *.PS file; why? I can with GIMP. Then I convert it to *.PNG, or *.SVG, and AS3 can import it; why do I have to jump through these hoops? I can say this, "I'm richer for Adobe's clumsiness."

Comment Re:Shiny things? (Score 3, Informative) 627

That won't work. The problem starts at step 2. If the top layer isn't reflective, then as it "boils away" it will convert incoming energy from the laser into heat efficiently enough to destroy any reflective layer that might be under it.

Even if that weren't the case, you'd still have a problem at step 3, because your reflective surface will still absorb too much energy. An expensive mirror that's new, clean, and in perfect condition would still absorb 5% of the energy hitting it in lab conditions. In the air, in combat conditions, coated with goo from the stealth paint that just got burned off of it, the reflective layer wouldn't last even a measurable fraction of a second.


Zombies As American Zeitgeist Proxies 263

blackbearnh writes "No doubt, there will be more than a few brain-munching glassy-eyed zombies showing up on the typical doorstep tonight, demanding brains, brains, brains, or at least some Milk Duds. But according to this essay over on, zombies are more than just the trendy monster on the block, they are to Americans what Godzilla is to Japanese: a personification of our fear of science and technology. 'It seems you can't throw a half-eaten cerebrum these days without hitting a posse of zombies brought to life by some kind of biological mishap (28 Days Later, Resident Evil, Planet Terror, Quarantine). Like Godzilla, zombies keep up with the times, always ready to mirror whatever aspect of science and technology people feel most uncertain about at the moment.'"

Slashdot Top Deals

Too many people are thinking of security instead of opportunity. They seem more afraid of life than death. -- James F. Byrnes