Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Anyone else here using GIMP? 

Its a free image/photo editor written by a heap of geeks.  I have used Photoshop CS4 ages ago but GIMP is just as good for general users like me.  Plus PS was a pirate version cos the actual software package cost was huge for a hobbyist. Its a pretty impressive package given that it is free.

Anyway, I have just done a couple of designs, made some vector art, transparencies, and some photo editing.  It also has some great 'how to' tutorials on youtube .

Was wondering if anyone else had used it. 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/475170-gimp-image-editor/
Share on other sites

Yeah, I've had it for a while, not sure how long but maybe 2010-15 sometime.  I really like what it can do, nice to know I'm not the only one.

Not cars [working on a coffee mug setup for my missus for Xmas actually]...but the spotted horse wasn't originally in this photo...hard to tell he wasn't though.  I haven't quite got the comparative size - I think he has to be made a bit bigger [which is easy to do]  - but I'm still working on it.

The four amigos.jpg

LOL, my newest laptop computer is about 8 years old and mainly lives in the bottom draw.

It comes out every so often to resize pictures and rip new music cd's so I can throw them on a hard drive.

No GIMPS for me then.

Cheers

2 hours ago, tridentt150v said:

not sure but I think GIMP will still operate OK on XP and up,  used to anyway.

I don't think he was talking about how old the PC is wrt to whether the GIMP will run on it.  I think he was saying that he is so "hella modern" (TM) that he uses his phone for everything and only pulls the laptop out on rare occasions.  Which is his perogative.  If my phone had a mouse and keyboard and 24" monitor, I'd use it for everything too.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
5 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

I don't think he was talking about how old the PC is wrt to whether the GIMP will run on it.  I think he was saying that he is so "hella modern" (TM) that he uses his phone for everything and only pulls the laptop out on rare occasions.  Which is his perogative.  If my phone had a mouse and keyboard and 24" monitor, I'd use it for everything too.

More like the computer is so old it takes 15 minutes to do anything after clicking on something.

My phone makes phone calls and does the googles, but sometimes I take a pic and they are too big for some forum pages.

The computer has that editor thingie that makes the pics "smaller".

I would rather spend money on car parts and alcohol than get a new computer, which will sit in the bottom draw and only get used when I rip discs or want to resize  a pic.

I've never really been a computer person, I was hoping for a easy fix using my phone.

And if I ask the missus or kid to use their one they would be all like "see, I told you you need a new computer", which would make me walk outside and yell at clouds....

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...