gthumb vs fspot

Dave Morley davmor2 at
Mon Nov 23 10:23:29 GMT 2009

After watching the uds video on applications,  Here are my general
findings as a novice user of both tools for photo editing.

Gthumb runs faster than fspot by about 10 second on one folder holding
about 69 photos.

From what I can see both apps grab the same info from the camera however
I prefer the way that gthumb displays this.

Captions can be added to photos in both gthumb and f-spot

Gthumb and fspot both have similar tool set for editing:
Redeye removal: is more intuitive in gthumb but gives an overall more
natural look in f-spot
Auto enhance: gthumb leaves f-spot in the dust.  although gthumb takes
longer to complete the image is far clearer and all colours are enhanced
Crop: The gthumb give you a nice windowed tool for this which I think
makes you feel as a novice like your not ballsing up your real photo.
However both apps do this with relevant ease.
resize: I think f-spot and gthumb both do this with the same level of
ease although in both cases I think it would be better to display %
rather than pixels how as a general user would I know how many pixels to
reduce a photo by, however I can see if it needs to be about 10%

Gthumb is let down by uploads to web photo albums like picasa flickr etc
I think if this could be added then gthumb would be a better app over
all, neither tool can upload to gallery2 which is pretty mich the
de-facto self build web/photo server which I think is a massive

On the whole you could replace f-spot with gthumb and most users simply
wouldn't notice, f-spot does organising no better or worse now, it's
only 2 big advantages I see are uploading to online galleries and
timeline view.

Dave Morley

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list