tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post2239679589616138163..comments2009-11-12T20:17:04.333+08:00jun auzahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14949001210993384627noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-42119835438365136532009-11-12T19:52:04.085+08:002009-11-12T19:52:04.085+08:00At *Studio Heroface (coming soon)*<br /><br />You sound like a pompous a**.<br /><br />At *Varun Pramanik*<br /><br />You make a good argument.<br /><br />---<br /><br />I&#39;m a fairly new user, I&#39;ve only been using the app a month or two for editing photos and drawing, but I&#39;m starting to question why most people bother to fork out so much for a propriety piece of software rather than download GIMP and customize it with a few plugins.<br /><br />I&#39;m actually a student on a gap year at the moment and have no money to buy Photoshop after I deleted from my laptop during a clean-out (I borrowed a friends copy to install it and now that friend is at uni so she can&#39;t give me the install disk). So I decided that while I save what little money I have for university and helping with bills, I would try GIMP. I&#39;d heard a couple of friends who had tried it so I gave it a shot.<br /><br />Originally I was irritated that I couldn&#39;t find the Quick Mask tool, but once I&#39;d found it I felt right at home, and now I just wish it was all in one window on my mac and not running under X11. But it&#39;s not a major problem just to click twice instead of once.<br /><br />Plus it runs so much more quietly than Photoshop ever did. :)<br /><br />Adobe are getting more ridiculous. Why do they keep bringing out new versions of Photoshop when ONE version isn&#39;t even stable? Why ask so much for it? The features of the program, as vast as they are, are still not really justification for forking out several hundred pounds every time a new version comes out just to stay up to date and have that TINY new feature that you will probably forget about once you&#39;ve used it to do what you need to do.<br /><br />The program is good, I&#39;ll give Adobe that, but I felt a lot of it was overcomplicated the entire time I used it during 6th form, and a lot of the time it crashed without reason (a few times upon launch and several times during my coursework). It took several weeks to learn how to use Photoshop, but GIMP took a few hours, not including the testing of the features and messing around with a photo of a friend so he had a cats head (I giggled immaturely the entire time I edited the image...XD).<br /><br />I suppose that is a little biased as I had, by then, learnt how to use image editors better. But GIMP just seems less fussy to me, while others will say getting things done is more fussy.<br /><br />I understand some people need photoshop for their work but that doesn&#39;t mean the person using it is superior to a GIMP user. If you think that you have your head buried in your colon.<br /><br />Photoshop and GIMP are NOT the same program, neither were they designed to BE the same program. But with GIMP showing so much promise to home users, it&#39;s becoming more popular and getting more coverage. Maybe one day it WILL be the true competitor to Photoshop.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-23907720158732089092009-10-22T10:12:47.019+08:002009-10-22T10:12:47.019+08:00here for those ppl missing the CMYK <br /><br />http://cue.yelowmagic.info/softwares/separate.htmlEduardohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10534317228906635425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-59735081398367323412009-10-12T10:01:35.801+08:002009-10-12T10:01:35.801+08:00My view as Graphic Designer. Some posts complaining about The Gimp only exposed themselves their lack of versatility and never used Mac version of Adobe Photoshop. Both applications share the base functionality and it is possible to customize keyboard shortcuts.<br />For the lack of CMYK support, I use Krita in Linux environment.Luya Tshimbalangahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05391142834277609577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-38303969484811455082009-08-27T16:36:06.834+08:002009-08-27T16:36:06.834+08:00Give me a freaking break! Even the most simple things are hard to do in Gimp. Gimp is the most counter intuitive program I&#39;ve worked with in my life. And that&#39;s saying something if you know Photoshop. I&#39;m using Gimp for now but it&#39;s costing me SOOO MUCH time to get something done. <br /><br />MarcAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-8412624689746187112009-08-04T12:22:19.717+08:002009-08-04T12:22:19.717+08:00Great Info...Bk Vaskarhttp://budurl.com/w5xmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-90075974504879101032009-07-24T15:58:26.054+08:002009-07-24T15:58:26.054+08:00I personally use The GIMP for all graphics designing I do and am quite happy with it. I agree with some of your points. However, I do feel that Photoshop is still better than the GIMP, but not for reasons such as functionality or features. While both are equally capable of accomplishing most graphics design related tasks, it&#39;s much simpler in Photoshop than in The GIMP. For example, in Photoshop it is pretty easy to apply a gradient of more than just two colours chosen by you, but in The GIMP, you must use the Gradient Editor [which is somewhat complex] to first create and save the gradient you want, and then perform the blend/gradient action.<br /><br />The GIMP has lots of potential, but sometimes I get a bit frustrated when it takes me more effort than is neccesary to complete a graphic design work. The User Interface is simple and clean, and once you start to get a hang of it, navigating through the interface can be done almost unconsciously.<br /><br />What GIMP really needs is good competition from another free and open source graphics editor. I don&#39;t recall where I read it, but I remember reading the opinion that there is an attitude of &quot;Oh, we have the GIMP. Let&#39;s not spend time making a graphics editor.&quot; in the open source community and I agree with it. GIMP&#39;s only competition is from closed source proprietary graphics editors, and when open source competes with proprietary, there are lots of hassles of dealing with patents and copyrights. However, when open source competes with open source, innovation always takes place and most of the aforementioned hassles start dissappearing due to clever work arounds, clean room reverse engineering and creativity. An obvious example is the Linux OS. I&#39;ve read countless opinions and articles about how Linux is supposedly useless and no competition for Windows or Mac OS. While Linux may not have the excellent UI and usability of Mac OS, I have found through personal experience that Linux is much better than Windows and just as capable as Mac OS. In fact, I enjoy using Linux a lot more because it&#39;s capable of accomplishing the best of jobs even when running on the worst of machines. In fact, Dreamworks created the movie &quot;Monsters vs. Aliens&quot; on a Linux OS, and most of the world&#39;s supercomputers run on Linux.<br /><br />Recently I learned of an open source editor named Nathive being developed, but it seems the developers are making it only for Linux. However, if Nathive is developed well then it might provide a stimulus to the GIMP to change in some ways. We might even see applications created using code merged from both the projects.<br /><br />In the end, all that matters is what suits you. After all, you can only be creative if you&#39;re happy and comfortable.<br /><br />VarunVarun Pramanikhttp://ivar.110mb.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-75273458907757660672009-06-16T21:34:25.848+08:002009-06-16T21:34:25.848+08:003. GIMP is wicked fast. The minimum recommended RAM requirement to run GIMP is only 128MB. The latest version of Photoshop will probably need 512MB at minimum.<br /><br />I have 2 GB of RAM, Standard for today. Photoshop uses as much as it gets and this is good, because it uses the RAM efficiently and it computes MUCH faster on heavy computations.<br /><br />What do you do with all your RAM? 128MB for GIMP, 64 MB for all the processes, a few MBs for Music and Browser. I&#39;m happy when a program uses my RAM, if it uses it efficiently and speeds up my workflow.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-83627074066366370682009-06-09T12:55:53.549+08:002009-06-09T12:55:53.549+08:00YES! Gimp is better than photoshop for all those reasons!! I ****completely**** agree with every last detail of them.<br /><br />The speed, GUI...EVERYTHING!!<br /><br />._____________.<br />/ . O . . O . \<br />| . . . . . . |<br />| .\ . . ./ . |<br />| . \____/. . |<br />|_____________|Leahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-37650971222886221362009-05-19T00:16:00.000+08:002009-05-19T00:16:00.000+08:00While the GIMP may not be for everyone and may not have the CMYK the PS users need, this might help get them pointed in the right direction:<br /><br />http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/04/03/8-handy-tweaks-to-make-gimp-replace-photoshop/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-17103533097835139062009-05-13T21:46:00.000+08:002009-05-13T21:46:00.000+08:00I agree with the previous poster... this is not a factual article.. it's an overly opinionated blog piece.<br /><br />If you took a full list of features from the latest versions of each program you will see clearly why photoshop is worth over $1000!<br /><br />The author himself states that he only occasionally needs to edit photos and so himself renders the rest of the package useless.<br /><br />but when it comes down to the better more advanced program there is NO contest.<br /><br />Gimp is no better than any of the free photo editors that come with your new camera or scanner.<br /><br />Take a features list from both programs and hold them next to each other. You'll need a ladder for the photoshop one.<br /><br />also, I am a qualified graphic artist/designer, I have been working professionally straight after college for 8 years now and I don't htink there has been a tool in the program I HAVEN'T used (even in the first 6 months of working) I even download 1 or 2 new tools absolutely free every week... will be getting CS4 very soon, I've been saving<br /><br />Well done me :PStudio Heroface (coming soon)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-46524669138315155802009-05-11T07:52:00.000+08:002009-05-11T07:52:00.000+08:00/*Why GIMP is Better than Adobe Photoshop"<br /><br />someone who makes such as statement is one who has not explored PS to its fullest.<br /><br />like saying a subcompact car is better than a midsize, or cheap denim is better than designer jeans./*<br /><br />I think the author in the first paragraph stated his position and opinion. Then List the reasons why HE thought GIMP was better than PS for HIM..not graphic professionals...<br /><br />Why would a short person get a mid size car instead of a compact OR a farmer get designer jeans to work in the fields instead of cheap jeans.<br /><br />That is his point. He didn't say he prints so he doesn't need CMYK nor any of the other things professional uses. He is looking for what he uses and compared the two and came to his conclusion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-45124511602196913422009-05-03T03:30:00.000+08:002009-05-03T03:30:00.000+08:00As a screen printer, I use photoshop all of the time. I have never had success with Gimp except for the most basic tasks. I would love to see improvement, but it's not up to speed yet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-9857816542518235932009-04-11T13:38:00.000+08:002009-04-11T13:38:00.000+08:00let's see it make 3d pictures PHOTOSHOP FTWAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-69323827433203121252009-04-08T03:01:00.000+08:002009-04-08T03:01:00.000+08:00I used PS for a long time, and I liked it a lot. Moved to Ubuntu and started using all the FREE apps including GIMP. It has a different approach to editing graphics than PS. Now, I'm good using both of them - I'm not a professional graphics editor. I wonder how much better GIMP could be if all the 'gimpers' would do a one-life-time donation of $50 or so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-65496962211194969662009-03-12T08:53:00.000+08:002009-03-12T08:53:00.000+08:00Yes Gimp is a great free program, not better than Photoshop just different and perfectly suitable for most graphic manipulation needs.<BR/>Thanks for posting this a bringing it to more public attention.Cagwaithttp://www.cagwait.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-88537982947929956242008-12-27T09:04:00.000+08:002008-12-27T09:04:00.000+08:00You are talking about one image editor being better than another one. But what does it actually mean "better". I have been thinking about it a few weeks ago and here is what I ended with: http://tan.staafl.net/2008/12/powerful-software/<BR/><BR/>Maybe it will give some of the arguments in proper perspective.Vlastahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03338175561000547384noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-39278364041369230602008-12-20T00:54:00.000+08:002008-12-20T00:54:00.000+08:00As a graphics professional that has seen/used most pixel manipulation/paint packages since De Luxe Paint II, I can happily confirm that though it has its UI quirks, the GIMP is perfectly adequate for any type of image manipulation related to the web or other screen-based image display.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-16857890016167775662008-11-13T07:15:00.000+08:002008-11-13T07:15:00.000+08:00I guess its pointless arguing here. Certainly Gimp has some good points to it, but this article is undoubtably biased and from a unqualifed source to really offer any concise opinion.<BR/><BR/>Yes you might be a professional in IT, but thats a world away from anything us Graphic Professionals do. I have been using photoshop for a very long time, (I still have the original install disks for v2.5).<BR/>I am also been a beta tester for some Autodesk software.<BR/><BR/>Speed and efficiency are my concern, yes photoshop takes time to start up, but this is by far offset by a streamlined and well considered interface and usability, this is my main reason aside from the obvious lack of features (re: lack of cmyk support and other proper colour management)<BR/><BR/>But to those that use gimp good on you. I'm sure for some people it meets all their needs. I hope the best of luck to the gimp, maybe with the open source community it will one day become a contender for photoshop's crown.<BR/>Photoshop has come a long way in the 16 or so years I've been using it, gimps future is bright if it can manage some of the same.<BR/><BR/>I look forward to future developments of both programs.Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09970883479695039969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-42243354203813630892008-11-03T11:15:00.000+08:002008-11-03T11:15:00.000+08:00"Why GIMP is Better than Adobe Photoshop"<BR/><BR/>someone who makes such as statement is one who has not explored PS to its fullest.<BR/><BR/>like saying a subcompact car is better than a midsize, or cheap denim is better than designer jeans.<BR/><BR/>zAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-84239836783344905762008-10-28T08:28:00.000+08:002008-10-28T08:28:00.000+08:00"this article is clearly written by a non-professional."<BR/><BR/>the author is a professional, IT pro to be exact. points included here are mentioned in general: Desktop users of all age, profession, etc.<BR/><BR/>*penguins rock!!*abyhttp://abycruz.multiply.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-92018096893031791662008-09-23T03:16:00.000+08:002008-09-23T03:16:00.000+08:00As a professional graphic designer who has used Photoshop and GIMP, I can say with all confidence:<BR/><BR/>GIMP sucks.<BR/><BR/>No CMYK support makes it USELESS for print design. And that's just the start. (The differences are well documented other places on the internet.)<BR/><BR/>Photoshop does not have a single superfluous feature, by the way. I earn my paycheck using Photoshop everyday and have used every feature before. They are all -- ALL -- useful. Photoshop is incredible.<BR/><BR/>I don't mean this harshly, but this article is clearly written by a non-professional.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-72949752765901880722008-07-28T17:16:00.000+08:002008-07-28T17:16:00.000+08:00"jan said...<BR/>you have given statements that, strangely, also seem to be directed to "everyone" aside from the statements which you gave for everyone. ... Let me ask who would not want something, if not everything, for free?"<BR/><BR/>And you proved his point. "Free" here means "having freedom," not "without cost." Free software is sometimes called <I>libre software</I>.Daengbohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17155385927782965826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-67469946528474303912008-07-15T05:46:00.000+08:002008-07-15T05:46:00.000+08:00Gimp rocks!!!<BR/><BR/>I never bothered with graphics editors before I tried Gimp, they were always too cluttered and looked far too complicated. It was always hard to work out which icon did what, but now I am using gimp, I have never turned back. I have used inkscape and blender to, but I stil haven't figured those out yet, while I am almost pro at gimp.<BR/><BR/>Yes...Gimp is great.ALEXANDER H DRACHMANNhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10179229739702549008noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-38370754363443353992008-07-14T17:31:00.000+08:002008-07-14T17:31:00.000+08:00Yes! GIMP is Great, but if you have difficulties with GIMP interface then maybe you can try GimPhoto.<BR/><BR/>GimPhoto is GIMP modification with:<BR/>- based on GIMP 2.4.<BR/>- new menu layout like PS.<BR/>- new shortcut like PS.<BR/>- CMYK separation.<BR/>- Layer Effects.<BR/>- new brushset and gradientset.<BR/>- packed many plugins to fill missing PS function on GIMP like Save for Web.<BR/>- packed with many photographic filters like Noise Reduction, B/W and IR.<BR/><BR/>http://www.gimphoto.comgimphotohttp://www.gimphoto.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5023590240909870844.post-53661720983414980142008-06-25T06:04:00.000+08:002008-06-25T06:04:00.000+08:00As the two previous posts say, GIMP is just a toy for playing with simple sRGB images. Think of it as GNU's version of MS paint or (as stated above) paint.net and you'll be making a fair and favourable comparison but comparing it with Photoshop is just silly. <BR/><BR/>The GIMP's developers have a total lack of interest/understanding in serious imageing. Despite recent positive noises about GEGL, I can't see them making any serious prgress any time soon. It's taken them since 2001 to get round to beginning to work on it! lol<BR/><BR/>Sadly, the only two decent image tools for GNU/Linux are (and for a very long time are going to remain):<BR/>Cinepaint - A 7 year old branch of GIMP with additional professional capabilites. It was abandoned when the GIMP people started talking about GEGL but luckily has been independently developed ever since and is actually quite good.<BR/>Or:<BR/>Photoshop under Wine. CS2 works perfectly for me, CS3 isn't far away.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com