GIMP vs Photoshop

[CYRN]

I'm picking up GIMP 2.0 and hopefully gives me an option to use PS or GIMP in next year or so when I upgrade my PC and laptop

There's 1 thing I love in photoshop is ease of recording "action" steps. It's gives me a lot of flexibility in batch processing with options to still make adjustment to individual pics.

 

[alwayschampion]

Photoshop has their photoshop 3 beta.

 

[slaam]

Photoshop has their photoshop 3 beta.

yups.. i tried the adobe lightroom beta and fell in love with it.. sigh but the trial period is ending...

 

[germ_boi]

Do you know it is technically possible to install photoshop in linux?

you just need to work using Terminal, if you are using Ubuntu. Try googling it.

 

[slaam]

Do you know it is technically possible to install photoshop in linux?

you just need to work using Terminal, if you are using Ubuntu. Try googling it.

fd this http://blog.publicidadpixelada.com/2006/10/10/how-to-adobe-photoshop-cs2-on-ubuntu-10-steps/

excited! haha but is it another wine emulation thingy?
anyway even if it works it prob be a pain to work with cos of slower processing times.. i can't tahan RAW file processing in win already haha if under emulator will be worse..

 

[slaam]

sighz ya another wine emul thing

 

[slaam]

http://grimthing.com/archives/2007/01/11/Gimp_vs_Photoshop/
excellent view on the debate from a commercial prepress guy!

 

[nottipiglet]

The only GIMP I know is the one that appeared in Pulp Fiction. Anyone remember that?

 

[stougard]

Even the creators of Gimp says that it is not as powerful as photoshop. In addition to that, people in the linux community agree that Linux have some miles to catch up with MS on a few areas especially in multimedia. Just the lack of colour management in Linux alone is enough to keep a lot of people from trying out linux. :think:

Multimedia and photo flow processing are two different things. About Multi-media, Linux is definitly more advanced than Windows as there is no DRM and such of things to bug your life, it's 10 times more reliable, faster and many files (video mostly) I could read with no problem on my Linux box but never on my Windows or my Mac.

For photo flow (PS and this kind of stuff), only pain lovers prefer Windows than MacOSX, MacOSX est definitly faster, more reliable, better integration ...

I never found what MS-Windows is really good for as, in fact, it does nothing really right and just keep trying to do everything. Unless you like to play PC-Games, I definitly see no point to use Windows instead of MacOSX or Linux. The only acceptable reason is that it's delivered by default with most of the PCs.

 

[Baldwin Jazz]

To put a simple cap on this argument ( discussion ? ) is it really about Gimp vs Photoshop or more about Linux vs Windows - my views are as follows .

Adobe Photoshop is a lot more widely used for one simple reason it runs in the windows environment and that I believe is the only reason for its preferential choice . Photoshop is the finished article that you pay for , you can add things such as pluggins and play about with the settings to suit yourself .

How many normal pc users have actually seen, let alone tried any of the Linux Distros ? The Gimp is on a par with Corel Paintshop Pro X , with two major factors in its favour, one it is free and two it is open source, so if you dont like what it does and you can handle Linux command line programming quite well , you rewrite the code to make it do what you want it to do, failing that there are numerous Linux Communities who will willingly help you out with professional advice , free software and ready made command lines to get you going with whatever your trying to achieve .

Summary - Adobe Photoshop and Windows XP - 8/10 ( how much does this cost ? )
The Gimp and Linux - 7/10 ( and this is all free )

 

[slaam]

To put a simple cap on this argument ( discussion ? ) is it really about Gimp vs Photoshop or more about Linux vs Windows - my views are as follows .

Adobe Photoshop is a lot more widely used for one simple reason it runs in the windows environment and that I believe is the only reason for its preferential choice . Photoshop is the finished article that you pay for , you can add things such as pluggins and play about with the settings to suit yourself .

How many normal pc users have actually seen, let alone tried any of the Linux Distros ? The Gimp is on a par with Corel Paintshop Pro X , with two major factors in its favour, one it is free and two it is open source, so if you dont like what it does and you can handle Linux command line programming quite well , you rewrite the code to make it do what you want it to do, failing that there are numerous Linux Communities who will willingly help you out with professional advice , free software and ready made command lines to get you going with whatever your trying to achieve .

Summary - Adobe Photoshop and Windows XP - 8/10 ( how much does this cost ? )
The Gimp and Linux - 7/10 ( and this is all free )

eh? Gimp can be installed in windows... so no need to drag OS into the brawl and you definitely dun need to use the cmd line for gimp. but if u do.. u can possibly use imagemagick to batch process all your photos in one command and go for a drink while the comp works its magic ( the bad thing is that not all photos can be processed the same way) heh you can ask my colleagues the same thing cos they are researching (for a living) on how to batch process images (eh hem microscope ones tho)
one thing that everyone agrees tho is that gimp doesn't have color management tools like photoshop for getting that accurate color rendition. ...

Gimparoo - Converting Photoshop Tutorials to Gimp
http://ubuntu.wordpress.com/2007/02/13/gimparoo-converting-photoshop-tutorials-to-gimp/

 

[Baldwin Jazz]

Hello Slaam , you have a valid point there , my apologies if went a little off track and didnt explain it properly , all im saying is , Linux and The Gimp are free , if you care to use Linux as an operating system anyone on a tight budget would benefit from this , leaving more money for new puchases to supplement your ever growing gadget bag

 

[cantaresg]

Well, it is generally agreed upon that Photoshop is much more powerful than GIMP. However, it also contains a lot of features that even professionals may never have used in their lifetime.

On the other hand, GIMP is free and its open source. If there are more people being dragged into the GIMP camp (especially the IT gurus), you may turn GIMP into a tool more powerful than photoshop?

PS: Doesn't GIMP have any plugins that can solve the colour management issue?

 

[Gunbucker]

Well, it is generally agreed upon that Photoshop is much more powerful than GIMP. However, it also contains a lot of features that even professionals may never have used in their lifetime.

I really wish Adobe would sell Photoshop in modules instead of one big behemoth of countless features. For instance, a photographer's module would not contain 3D texture rendering features.

Both CS2 and the yet-to-be-released CS3 are beyond my budget (of an amateur shooter), so I'm sticking with Gimp. The most expensive photography related software I own to date is Apple's Aperture.

 

[Zplus]

I really wish Adobe would sell Photoshop in modules instead of one big behemoth of countless features. For instance, a photographer's module would not contain 3D texture rendering features.

Both CS2 and the yet-to-be-released CS3 are beyond my budget (of an amateur shooter), so I'm sticking with Gimp. The most expensive photography related software I own to date is Apple's Aperture.

They do... its called Photoshop Elements....

 

[Gunbucker]

They do... its called Photoshop Elements....

Does Elements have the Layer features, USM, LAB Mode, curves features? If so, I'm really intrigued.

 

[lsisaxon]

Does Elements have the Layer features, USM, LAB Mode, curves features? If so, I'm really intrigued.

see http://forum.clubsnap.com/showthread.php?t=264192

 

[spazzer]

i really prefer photoshop like dodge and burn!

 

[mervinb]

I've been using GIMP since pre-2.0 versions, when it was quite buggy (on Windows) and features were poor. With 2.2, frankly you can do most of the things you need other than colour management and CMYK separation.

Brush management is poorer than PS (I'm always impressed when I see a PS user scaling a brush like magic..) but the next release has reasonable brush scaling (2.3.xx development versions, which are currently quite stable on Windows). The most popular raw plugin, UFRaw, is very good, and has improved dramatically over the past months. It now includes an excellent denoiser, and it's interpolation routines are state of the art.

I'm not willing to pay for PS, in part because I'm proficient enough with GIMP that I can do all that I need. At $0, I can run one (legal) copy per PC/laptop at home and work .

 

[estel]

Brush management is poorer than PS (I'm always impressed when I see a PS user scaling a brush like magic..) but the next release has reasonable brush scaling (2.3.xx development versions, which are currently quite stable on Windows).

agreed. This is one thing i could never get used to once i switched from PS to Gimp several years ago.