What do you guys make your covers with?

[Gregg Bell]

Hey thanks everybody for the feedback. I'm checking out everything. Inkscape looks great (if a little technical with the SVG stuff and all). That photo serif looks good. (But it sounds a little annoying, always reminding you of the features you're missing out on in the upgraded version.) And then there is GimpPhoto, which I figured, what the heck if I'm going to do that, I might as well try GIMP (I already have GIMP). So I started experimenting with GIMP again. It wasn't as bad as it usually is. The text seemed more do-able. But getting it to re-size took more than the GIMP tutorial and a former GIMP teacher (on Google). Really it took all that and dumb luck. But it is powerful. It whips through stuff paint.net chugs through. And how come nobody says anything about paint.net? Save its lack of power, I think it's great.

[Gregg Bell]

It's between PhotoplusSE and PhotoPosPro. Anybody have any opinions on these two?

[kennyc]

Sorry I'm not familiar with either.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

That photo serif looks good. (But it sounds a little annoying, always reminding you of the features you're missing out on in the upgraded version.)

Hm. Sorry. The last time I've looked at it, was years ago. Back then, it was just an older version, without any changes.

I see PhotoPlus SE is now a seperate product from Serif PhotoPlus; a bit like Photoshop Elements stands to Photoshop. I don't know this version.

I've never heard of the other program you mention.

And then there is GimpPhoto, which I figured, what the heck if I'm going to do that, I might as well try GIMP (I already have GIMP).

GimpPhoto and GimpShops are hacks to make GIMP look more like Photoshop with regards to the menu names and option names and such. They're not developed very actively, if at all. My suggestion would be to use either GIMP or Photoshop, not some sort of "Photoshop-ifified" GIMP that's months or even years behind behind the curve.

And how come nobody says anything about paint.net? Save its lack of power, I think it's great.

Paint.NET was never intended to do serious stuff with. That's not powerful is the entire issue. It's not called Paint.NET for nothing; it's a replacement for MS Paint

[crich70]

I just use GIMP for making covers from a combination of backgrounds and images that are in the PD. Wikipedia is my friend there. There are plenty of pics of authors whose books are in PD (though not every PD author's page has a picture, or one that is easily usable).

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by crich70

I just use GIMP for making covers from a combination of backgrounds and images that are in the PD. Wikipedia is my friend there. There are plenty of pics of authors whose books are in PD (though not every PD author's page has a picture, or one that is easily usable).

Thanks crich

Originally Posted by Katsunami

GimpPhoto and GimpShops are hacks to make GIMP look more like Photoshop with regards to the menu names and option names and such. They're not developed very actively, if at all. My suggestion would be to use either GIMP or Photoshop, not some sort of "Photoshop-ifified" GIMP that's months or even years behind behind the curve.



Paint.NET was never intended to do serious stuff with. That's not powerful is the entire issue. It's not called Paint.NET for nothing; it's a replacement for MS Paint

Thanks Kat. Appreciate the heads-up about the Photoshopiffified GIMPs. And poor paint.net. All it needs is some more power!

But this Photo Pos Pro looks powerful.

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multime...-Pos-Pro.shtml