...all I've heard from the comments were complaints (read them yourself) so buyer beware. lol

Though I would like this program myself, I'll pass, but maybe some of you more adventurous types might bite (and hopefully not crash their PCs).

https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/style/

Downloaded and installed into Windows 10 64 bit

Settings


Results took 25 minutes or so to render.

ASCII Empty same settings
This also took exactly 25 minutes.



Just a heads up Lyle.
Your images are auto saved into Users/USERNAME/Pictures/Style folder

Seems way too slow, Rod. I'll wait until David figures out how to coax G'MIC to transfer styles (yes; David's looking into it).

Sounds good to me Lyle i would rather not use this software. It really consumes your RAM. So i will probably do all the styles and see if i like any particular ones. If not i will uninstall it.

OK; Style at GAOTD is back. Yes; it still will crash on images not much bigger than 1500px on my system (so 1024px I use then uprez), but still, the results are very unique and worth the install. I did so last time (said I wouldn't but did; no regrets. I just know the limitations when it comes to my horse (PC that is). lol).

https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/style-2-2-0-4-win-mac/

Style: John Constable

ref: http://www.fontplay.com/freephotos/thir ... 108-21.jpg

OK; it's 4:49am and I'm about to head off to work in a bit for a 14 hour. It is what it is. lol

I admit I had to add all kinds of embellishments with this result since, for starters, I had to uprez it and also, this style doesn't play well with horizons and skies.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/34520999@ ... 8/sizes/o/

Got it.
Which effect(s) do you like better, Lyle?
(w/o any pre-post-process, except downscaling not to wait a lot)

Nice result Lyle, I dig it.

Thanks Warrior.

To answer Diego, I like the more goofball like ones, such as outline. Don't really have a favorite preset, though.

In general, having tried all effects -except ASCII- both using and not using image colours, I feel quite disappointed.
Oil painting has nothing to do with oil painting, same for watercolour, same for pointillism,....
It looks like a software initiated then suspended by the author when he/she was at 20% of the definitions of the goals and the methodology.
But -as ancient Romans said- de gustibus non disputandum est.

Come on, Diego; you need to embrace the DMT and your 3rd eye. lol

Took Psychodelic preset, and massaged it with both the original image and with G'MIC and FotoSketcher and this is what came of it. I see the potential of things, Diego. I never take output from filters at face value. I just look at filters as tools to be exploited.

I like that last one a lot, Lyle.

Thanks, Pat.

Last one looks like a good outcome but I can understand you wanting to exploit the filters and find out just exactly how much they can do

Ya, Lyle and me have different approaches to filters.
For me, a released filter has to provide a good outcome just using the default set-up.
It is (was) my objective also when producing my own filters: if a tester finds they produce not nice results using defaults, I modify it before (or just after) releasing it.
Afterwards (i.e. if the first condition is met), it could be nice to exploit variations with post-processing steps.
In the case of "Style", I did run it in all pre-sets, with and without image colours, and 90-95% of results were bad IMO. This is not what I would expect from a filter which takes a so loooong time to produce an outcome.

In my younger retouch days, I was pursuing the dream that a single filter/script could give you a masterpiece Diego. I stopped that pursuit years ago. Some exceptions of course like the Engrave preset (G'MIC) which can pretty much give you a single click artistic result. Regardless, I look at all plugins/script as tools; brushes if you will. To each his/her own.