Photoshop Elements 10 or other photoshop programs?

[ChristianCDA]

I am getting into photoshopping photos for lindens. i was thinking of doing "avatar to abstract/real life photos", and "face swapping" kind of deals. i plan on buying elements 10 since it is cheaper than any cs programs. as far as i know, elements and cs are the only 2 programs that are good to use. ive tried the trial for elements 10, but not cs5 yet. Should i just save alittle more for CS5 or just go with elements 10?

[Peggy Paperdoll]

If cost is a factor, why not use GIMP?  It's 100% free and is more than capable of doing what I think you are wanting to do.  Merging or swapping parts of images from SL with parts of real life photos is something I've done many times using GIMP. 

http://www.gimp.org/downloads/

[valerie Inshan]

I agree with Peggy. CS5 is way too expensive. Gimp is a good alternative. However, Elements has enough basic functions to allow you to play with your pics. Here's a link to extra (free) filters you may find amusing (even Torley Linden does! :smileyhappy:)

http://www.filterforge.com/download/

[ChristianCDA]

Thanks for the advise! I highly appretiate it. Cost is really not a huge factor but since elements is about $100, it aint bad. I am looking at GIMP right now but I am still leaning towards elements 10. But you never know...

[Peggy Paperdoll]

I'm not going to try to talk you into GIMP if you think PS Elements 10 is more comfortable.   PS is, after all, known as the image editing standard.......the set the bar, so to speak.  GIMP's biggest negative is it's user interface being somewhat "unintuitive" which is important when you are just beginning with the program.........later, once you get familar with it, it's not important at all.  PS also has filters that many find useful that GIMP does not have.....but you can still do the same thing with GIMP.  Just not with a simple running of a filter (you might have to do the process in 2 or 3 steps instead of 1).

I only tried PS a few times using trail versions.  What I noticed right off is that PS's interface is much more icon oriented than GIMP.  I actually find that harder to work with than menus written in text instead of symbols..........and I know I'm probably in a minority on that point (I like to read what the menu is instead of seeing some symbol).  The only potential problem I see if you go with Elements 10 is that, I've heard, it's sort of a stripped down PS package.....not all the features and power of the Photoshop software package (a "poor man's" PS).  And Adobe's releasing a package like that is great since Photoshop is the most expensive image editing software available (with all it can do, the cost is really not all that out of line).  But, what typically happens with the limited versions is that you "outgrow" what it can do and to upgrade to a more powerful version it costs more money.  If you're a hobbiest like me it's hard to justify spending money when there is a free alternative that is, or all intents and purposes, every bit as powerful...........slightly more inconvenient on the UI front and some of the filters but it can do anything an editing program needs to do for anything in SL.  No handy painting on a 3D model though.

It's free.  It costs you nothing to download and install.  Get your Elements but get GIMP too.  Play with them both to get familar with both programs.  If you do that I think you will find that you will wind up using both...........I actually do that myself with GIMP and Paint.NET.  Paint.NET has a couple filters that, though GIMP has the same filters, are defaulted to settings that I like making them easier to use.  I swap parts of my images and textures back and forth all the time between the two programs.

[Rage Riptide]

He's already said he's "into photoshopping photos". Gimp is a non starter. Noone ever Gimped a photo, or even edits one these days. Successful marketing is successful.

[Peggy Paperdoll]

I GIMP photos all the time.    I defy you or anyone else to look at a photo that has been enhanced (altered, or otherwise fixed) and tell what program was used to accomplish that.  It's impossible to tell.  Photoshopping a photo or image has become a popular term for any photo that has been altered using image editing software.......videos can be "photoshopped" and Photoshop does not support video editing.  Adobe did not invent "photoshopping" as a marketing tool..........it came into popular use from people editing photos (possibly bu using Photoshop but not necessarily).  Photoshop is, by far, the most well known image editing program..........it's not the only one and not necessarily the best for every person (it's just the best known).  When people think of refrigerators most think of Frigidaire regardless of wherher or not the maker of the refrigerator actually is (GE, Amana, Sub Zero, Whirlpool, etc).  It's the public association that coins many of these terms we all hear.  You can 'photoshop" a photo using GIMP, Paintshop Pro, Paint.NET, Picasso or any editing program that can manipulate part or all of an image.

I only mentioned GIMP because the OP seemed a little concerned witth the cost of the software.  If that is a concern, there is an alternative that has no cost at all.  And the program I mentioned is just as capable of "photoshopping" a photo as Photoshop is.  It seems the OP is leaning to Elements 10..........which I believe costs about $100.  If he is comfortable with spending $100 on Elements then I won't try to talk him out of his decision.  But I, personally, would not do it if I had any doubts at all............I'd go for the least expensive (free in this case).  If I knew what I wanted and it's cost was something I was comfortable with I'd purchase what I knew I I wanted and skip the less expensive (though if there was a free program that had promise I probably would, at least, try it before I spent the money.........you never know what that $100 might come in handy for tomorrow).

 

 

 

[Tamara Artis]

I would suggest to save some money and buy CS5. I am thinking about it too! I worked as a photographer in SL for almost a year (on leave now) and used Gimp. Feel free to take a look at the photos I did, all with Gimp. It was free and to be honest, for me it looked stupid to save money for an ultra-expensive program, I'll probably never use professionally, never learn more than few basic actions that I used all the time, and all that so I could spend hours editing photos for (compared with RL, cause I was using rl time!) amount of money sooo small, that I'm actually ashamed to say it lol, and for people who were like "Gimp, whats that?? Why don't you get PS like all SL photographers?"

But Rage was right, its all about marketing. Noone ever gimped a photo. People connect PS with quality and if you say you're using it, people will automatically connect you with quality. No matter how good or bad your photos are. 

[20s]

The only major difference from what I've seen between CS5 and GIMP is the smudge tool. I recommend not using the smudge tool at all. 

Either way, you will have to get used to one. If you are just starting out I'd save money, and just get gimp. Maybe buy a cheap tablet to start off too. 

Reminds me of the days I used gimp and a touchpad. Now using CS5 and a cintiq.

Never the less, there are a lot of successful artists who use gimp. People always think their work will get a million times better after they change to an expensive editing software. That's not the case though. Infact GIMP would probably be better, default effects seem to be better.

Basically, if you're just doing it on second life, and just starting out. I would not purchase any Photoshop if it's just for Second Life.

Not sure if you knew, but morphing the heads of avatars onto real life photos is actually stealing. Despite the fact that most people in Second Life don't care, it's unfair to the photographer and model of the real photograph. There is no artistic talent in morphing. People in Second life are always looking for something new, art styles that are new to them. Looking at morph photographs gets really boring.

That being said, I do like your idea of abstract avatars. I'd totally be down for that.