“Photo Editing for Real People with Fotox” has an article about Fotox, a photographic tool for Real People. It allows to create panoramas, HDR images and has basic editing functions such as sharpening, red eyes removal or rotation. It only supports JPEG.

I will not use Fotox because I am not a Real Person, I am a Photography Nerd: I want RAW files exported to 16bits TIFFs 🙂

But I am happy to see that using Linux for photography is getting some mainstream attention…


9 Responses to “Photo Editing for Real People with Fotox”

  1. Carla Schroder says:

    Hi Joel,

    Real people and nerds unite! I’m on a bit of a mission to popularize photo editing and archive management using Linux. I’m tired of the culture that believes Photoshop is king, Aperture is Queen, and everything else is beneath notice. There are a lot of nice tools that don’t cost gazillions of dollars or run on inferior operating systems 🙂

    This is a nice site, you’re doing a good job.

    best regards,

  2. Bob K. says:

    Well for now and probably the distant future, Photoshop will remain King!. At the rate Gimp is going, it will never come close. Look how long it is taking just to get 16/32bit and CMYK support. What Linux needs is some good programmers who ask the pro photographers, and enthusiasts what they want and need, and deliver. Not ponder on it for years on end. And begin to put out programs that will get recognized by the photographic community. And yes even marketing time in top photography magazines.

  3. Carla Schroder says:

    Gimp is perfectly fine for Web images and good-quality prints. 16/32bit and CMYK are for fine art prints and high-quality print publications, which is a pretty small subset of users who do digital imaging, and the leading Linux contender for this segment is Krita. If I may intrude on this excellent blog with a link to an article of my own:
    “Fie on Photoshop: Krita, the Real Photoshop Killer” gives an overview.

    Other excellent related Linux applications are Digikam, F-Spot, and ImageMagick, to name just a few.

    This is interesting:
    “Gimp vs. Photoshop”

    Photoshop and Aperture users seem to be well-entrenched, and not particularly interested in looking for alternatives. That’s fine with me- I don’t care for either one for various reasons, and I am happy to see that there is a growing number of open-source editing and archiving applications, plus a herd of related tools such as color management and device profilers. There are also opportunities to make your own mark by contributing to any of these- they don’t have zillions of dollars or unlimited programmer-power. Slip them a few dollars, write code, help noobs, write helpful howtos- every bit helps. I like this site a lot, Joel has a way of explaining complex concepts in a simple and clear way. It’s been a big help to me as I work at becoming a better photographer.

  4. jcornuz says:

    Hi there,

    Thanks for your comments and encouragements.

    I think we live in a world were “post-processing” = Photoshop. And I believe that the only measure that people use to check a photo editing tool is Photoshop and that hurts Gimp quite a bit:
    * the UI has to be “like Photoshop”.
    * Gimp always lacks “the great features that Photoshop has” no matter whether they are useful in everyday life or not.

    However, the area of web-development is pretty well covered with the current Gimp and photographic work is on its way – although not as quickly as one could wish.

    Take care,


  5. prokoudine says:

    Well, Fotox is great in the sense of huge user demand for an application like that, and that’s not an overestimation. I’ve heard gazillion of times that GIMP is too heavy for simple tasks and that none of other applications “cut it”. Earlier I used to say “Just use mtPaint”. These days I say “Use Fotox” 🙂

    But soon it’s going to be the day when I say “Just use F-Spot”. We only have to wait till all three F-Spot’s GSoC2008 projects are successfully accomplished.

    Hint: you want interviewing Ruben at the end of this summer 😉

  6. newmikey says:

    As to Photoshop: I think it is heavily overrated and gravely underused. Have a look at the posts on Dpreview and you will see what PS is used for: levels, curves and a bit of USM! You do NOT need PS for that at all, it is the kind of elitism I have grown to abhor.

    Then try to post an image with text that says:

    “I did levels and curves in PS, burnt some areas and gave it some USM”
    No comment on the software, nice comments on the image, some advice how to improve etc.

    Do the same, but:
    “I did levels and curves in GIMP, burnt some areas and gave it some USM”
    Comment on how bad the software is and how it does not live up to the gazillion functions of PS, the image is totally depreciated – bad composition, oversharpened, generally inferior PP, no advice how to improve because you are hopeless anyway.

    I have turned to leaving out the name of the software used. Let everybody rate the image and wait until someone with 2000$ worth of software asks the question “why didn’t you use xxxxxx PS action from yyyyy website?” and reply “Action? These were batch converted with UFRaw and ImageMagick and lightly edited with Gimp on the PCLinuxOS DPE”…………………utter silence………………..until the first one that previously rated the image very high goes: “Oh yeah, easy to see that the image looks ……”

    And all of those people that are soooo happy with PhotoShop? Wouldn’t you be happy if you spent 700 bucks on a piece of software and had to justify that to your wife? Wouldn’t you try to justify that expense at every turn?

  7. Bob K. says:

    There are way more users of Photoshop then Gimp who have justified paying the high cost you mention. For many, having and using Photoshop is a requirement for their job. Allot of them look forward to every release, and will pay the big bucks for it. Pick up a Photography magazine at a local bookstore and see if you find any Gimp articles, or people who use the Gimp in those articles.

  8. NewMikey says:

    “There are way more users of Photoshop then Gimp who have justified paying the high cost you mention.”
    What exactly did you want to say here? We know there are more and we also know they justified the high cost. I simply do not believe that justification stands up to scrutiny in many cases.

    “For many, having and using Photoshop is a requirement for their job. Allot of them look forward to every release, and will pay the big bucks for it. ”
    For many? Not quite, I think quite possibly for some. All of the others are pretending and lying through their teeth when they say they “need” it. Most of them would be lost even in Picasa, let alone PS.

    “Pick up a Photography magazine at a local bookstore and see if you find any Gimp articles, or people who use the Gimp in those articles.”
    Well, to be honest, more and more magazines are paying attention, coming to their senses. After all, it is rather ridiculous to run a series on how to do xxxx in PS in an amateur photography magazine when you know 80% of your readers audience do not (legally)own PS. Tutorials using PSP, Gimp and others are becoming more and more the standard.

    Bob, you come up with self-evident facts and transparent excuses/misconceptions. None of that counters the fact that 99% of the manipulation that 99% of the users do in PS, is quite easily done in Gimp at a fraction (0) of the cost.

    You try to justify that by pointing out the 1% of 1% that need more than that. So be it.

  9. the says:

    This is my first time pay a quick visit at here and
    i am actually happy to read everthing at one place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: