Sure, though clearly I need to explain that it&#x27;s not symmetric. I don&#x27;t expect a filter to output a beautiful image. It is possible for some filters to be neutral while others spit out &quot;ugly&quot; results. And, of course, ugly is strictly my biased personal opinion, not an objective result.<p>What makes filters more ugly to me is filters that aren&#x27;t very functional as a building block or a node in the middle of an image processing graph. When I said aesthetically unpleasant, I was thinking about <i>design</i> too, not just the aesthetics. Filters that include any aesthetics at all, frankly, are not very useful, and that is the main problem with many of G&#x27;MICs (and ImageMagick&#x27;s) filters. Photoshop has some too.<p>I&#x27;m using <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gmicol.greyc.fr&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gmicol.greyc.fr&#x2F;</a> as the reference for filter names.<p>G&#x27;MIC Filters that are useful as a building block (filters you&#x27;re likely to find used by professionals), and are not aesthetically unpleasant:<p>Basics, Colors|Channel Processing, Contours|Difference of Gaussians, Degradations|Blur, Details|Sharpen, Repair|Upscale<p>A small sampling of G&#x27;MIC Filters that are aesthetically unpleasant to me, primarily because they are poor building blocks (less likely to be used in professional work), secondarily because they add an aesthetic that I personally don&#x27;t like, and try to do too much:<p>Arrays|Puzzle, Artistic|Ellipsionism, Deformations|Rain drops, Frames|Tunnel, Lights &amp; Shadows|Shadow Patch, Patterns|Hearts, Rendering|Cupid, Sequences|Lava Lamp<p>Note that many of these could be re-created easily using proper image processing building blocks, like an over operator for compositing, or an expression node for image warping.