Does anyone know of a program in which a novice graphics artist could get started? I have an idea for the logo for my band, and I wouldn't mind being able to create a rough (computer) sketch of it.

www.gimp.org

If your running Windows give Paint.NET a try.

Gimp x2, though it's not the easiest to start with. Course neither is Photoshop.

If you're on OS X you have a bunch of new great apps to choose from. Three of the best are:

http://www.pixelmator.com/

http://flyingmeat.com/acorn/

http://www.getdrawit.com/

Trying both of those, thanks (I'm a windows and linux guy).

Gimp x3

I hear alot of good things about Gimp.

There seems to be an unhealthy fascination with gimps around here...

BOO-YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are tons of free copies of Photoshop Elements freely available. And it's a great gateway drug into the real Photoshop.

Now as for Gimp. Well, it's an aptly named gimped program.

Well, you do get what you pay for.

Sounds like someone hasn't taken the time to learn how to use Gimp.

Sounds like someone hasn't taken the time to learn how to use Gimp.

I am all for open source software, but that doesn't mean it is best. I keep a computer around with XP on it, JUST for Lightroom and photoshop CS3. There isn't anything better than those adobe products. Bar None. Gimp can try, but it cannot hold a candle. Maybe with a few more years of dev, it can compete with what PS has NOW.

I didn't say it was the best, but I don't think it is 'gimped'.

I also have Photoshop CS3 on my XP computer, and find it just as difficult to use as the Gimp.

photohshop7 and illustrator 10 on osx jag was the golden age. i still run ps6 and illustrator9 on os9.2 for nostalgic purposes

cs is lame.

I am all for open source software, but that doesn't mean it is best. I keep a computer around with XP on it, JUST for Lightroom and photoshop CS3. There isn't anything better than those adobe products. Bar None. Gimp can try, but it cannot hold a candle. Maybe with a few more years of dev, it can compete with what PS has NOW.

apple aperture is better than lightroom. But doesn't run on XP And aperture is good.

Sounds like someone hasn't taken the time to learn how to use Gimp.

Isn't that always the case. Open source software is only free if your time has no value.

I didn't say it was the best, but I don't think it is 'gimped'.

I also have Photoshop CS3 on my XP computer, and find it just as difficult to use as the Gimp.

Its not about ease of use, it about the processing power/options that it is capable. Gimp IS a gimp in this regard.

apple aperture is better than lightroom. But doesn't run on XP And aperture is good.

I'll look into it, for when I need to replace this aging PC I use to edit photos.

Its not about ease of use, it about the processing power/options that it is capable. Gimp IS a gimp in this regard.

I tend to agree the problem with Gimp is it's limited functionality not it's ease of use.

Isn't that always the case. Open source software is only free if your time has no value.

Huh? Photoshop isnt easy to learn either buddy.

As for Gimp having limited functionality... I guess I'm not using either piece of software for as advanced purposes as you, because I haven't noticed it.

apple aperture is better than lightroom. But doesn't run on XP And aperture is good.

Bibble > Aperture

Unless you're browsing/tagging-> Breezebrowser. It doesn't run on Mac

I'll try not to laugh at the bibble suggestion.

I'll try not to laugh at the bibble suggestion.

It has the most comprehensive toolset of any RAW converter I've come across. Older versions sucked and were unstable, yes, but I can do everything in a normal workflow short of good sharpening and CMYK conversion in Bibble instead of PS.

It has the most comprehensive toolset of any RAW converter I've come across. Older versions sucked and were unstable, yes, but I can do everything in a normal workflow short of good sharpening and CMYK conversion in Bibble instead of PS.

Have you used Lightroom?

I've tried it before, and I plan on giving it a more thorough audition this break. The things I really rely on in Bibble aside from standard adjusments are integrated Noise Ninja, a third-party plugin that does skin tone correction, and on occasion the healing brush. Doing these in RAW instead of PS is so much better. Also, LR seemed a bit slower, and the cropping was weird when I tried it. I doubt I'd use LR to replace Breezebrowser for tagging/captioning, either.

I admit I kind of go against the grain for photo software- everyone's god in the newspaper/wire world is Photo Mechanic, and I absolutely hate it.