The great smiley reform act of 2013

[Necroscope]

 

[4249]

 

[Ninjerk]

Might need rescaling or cleaning up idk

 

[tuluse]

it's a bit big, can you source from the original size (ie window mode)

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Yes we need this meme facepalm emote to improve the quality of the discussion.

 

[Ninjerk]

 

[Zep Zepo]

Small, it looks like a dinosaur head and neck standing in front of a mountain.

Zep--

 

[Ninjerk]

Small, it looks like a dinosaur head and neck standing in front of a mountain.

Zep--

 

[Zed]

it's a bad smiley

 

[Ulminati]

Saving it here for later use

 

[Jasede]

"He's NOT the father!"

 

[Ninja Destroyer]

Could someone crop the obvious thing from this picture.

 

[Jasede]

 

[Ulminati]

:fabulous:

 

[AW8]

As Laydie Errah said on the last page, this needs to become an official smiley:

You cannot argue with this fact. You cannot deny the truth in my words. It has to be added. It simply has to.

The continued existance of the forum depends on it. Do not fail us. Add the edgy-smiley ASAP. Lives are in the balance. Sentences are short. Comma signs are unheard of. Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi. You are my only hope.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

:romance:

 

[Thane Solus]

Could someone crop the obvious thing from this picture.

What?

 

[Ninja Destroyer]

Excellent , thanks Thane.

 

[A user named cat]

People should really use pen tool in Photoshop to make clean cuts and selections. It's easy once you get the hang of it and will give you the best results. Avoid magic wand, feathering or any similar methods. Otherwise you get things like weird edges and stray garbage pixels. They can be easily seen by adding a stroke effect:



Here is a pen tool cut version.

 

[Baron Dupek]

Paint.net and GIMP do it for free, unless you want that "fook da polis" feeling of bringing the PS from the seven seas sail.

 

[A user named cat]

Both of those are vastly inferior to Photoshop in about every regard.

I also think about 3% of PS users you encounter online actually paid for it, especially with the retarded subscription service they introduced with CC.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Both of those are vastly inferior to Photoshop in about every regard.

I heard someone say once GIMP was actually better than Photoshop. Can you elaborate? I'm just curious.

 

[Nikaido]

Photoshop has non destructive image editing. That means at any point in time you can change the setting of a filter, or contrast you modified etc without having to backtrack and redo everything you did from that point. Gimp is still the stone age of image editing. Photoshop introduced the first element of non destructive editing in 4.0, 1996. The GIMP is still a worse, less productive tool than one of the oldest edition of toshop. They said they'd introduce things like these with GEGL but it's 2015 and the idea of a non-destructive workflow where everything you do can be changed and undone as a single element without touching the rest is still a pipedream for gimp.

By the way, even freewares like Picasa can handle a non-destructive workflow. Picasa is a toy, and doesn't have much in terms of feature set, but the base capability is there in the engine, something GIMP can't seem to grasp.
Krita can do it in the world of open source software, but it's focused on painting features (more like Corel Painter) rather than photo/generic image editing. If you hate the idea of using photoshop, I'd say try your luck with Krita instead. It's focused on painting tools but it still has editing tools too and you won't feel like you're using prehistoric 1980 level of workflow.
http://download.vikis.lt/doc/kde/HTML/en/krita/layers-adjustment.html
Krita actually has a competent development team and it's constantly evolving.

You can find more information on the features here:
http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/adjustment-layers/
https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/adjustment-fill-layers.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/layer-effects-styles.html

Basically, you changed the contrast, then made some other edits to your pic. You want to change the contrast again? no need to undo anything, because none of those things did permanent transformation to the picture, it's applied in real time and saved as metadata rather than transforming the actual image (that is, until you do export it as a final .png or whatever).

This kind of workflow exists since 1996. Working with anything else is like going back to the fucking stone age. Work smarter, not harder. Why waste your time on a pile of shit that takes 10x more time and effort to get things done? Sure, you can do anything with GIMP, as long as you don't give a fuck about the amount of wasted time.

 

[A user named cat]

Both of those are vastly inferior to Photoshop in about every regard.

I heard someone say once GIMP was actually better than Photoshop. Can you elaborate? I'm just curious.

It's mostly interface issues and being extremely unintuitive. It's fine for basic stuff but I'd dump it in a heartbeat if you're looking to do anything more.

I can't imagine all the steps and workarounds required in order to make something like a seamless gif or cinemagraph in GIMP. Plus being able to apply plugin effects and filters via smart objects. All of which are easily done in PS:

Spoiler

 

[Clockwork Knight]

:joinedyesterday: