5 ms·

What's wrong with GIMP? I use it every day and find it pretty good. On the MAC now it has lots of weird glitches but they seem pretty fixable...

dsego 9y ago
There was nothing wrong with Windows 95.
crispyambulance 9y ago
GIMP is perfectly fine (for many use-cases), but its not what you or I think that matters. Perhaps the best person to ask is a photoshop user who actually paid for it?
- rgbrenner 9y ago
  I pay for creative suite. GIMP is very far behind. There are many significant core features missing, and many tools missing that make it difficult and time consuming to use. It would be more accurate to call it 'advanced paint' than photoshop. CS is expensive and I use a small part of its features... if GIMP covered just 25% of what photoshop could do, I would use it. But I think the only people who think GIMP is close to replacing it are those that have never used/learned photoshop.
  - tomc1985 9y ago
    Do you really use GIMP? Because I don't think you use it very much if you think that it is a quarter of Photoshop. Adobe regularly copies features from the GIMP, like content-aware fill
    - rgbrenner 9y ago
      I'm well aware of the status of GIMP. I first used it 15+ years ago. I used it for many years before buying PS. I last used it maybe 6 months ago. I like to check it out occasionally when my CS subscription is up for renewal. I actually pay, not just for CS, but an entire Windows computer to run it. The rest of my computers run Linux, and I use open source software everywhere. I would absolutely love to switch to GIMP, if it were at all possible.
      - tomc1985 9y ago
        Well, GIMP's interface is definitely different from PS. And I wouldn't argue better... But PS is the only program I have ever had to take a class in to be productive in, as it was clearly built to be familiar to people with very clearly-formed ideas about workflow, e.g. old-school photography and design folks. And switching to GIMP is possible methinks, you just have to learn the interface. Just like Photoshop...
        mustacheemperor 9y ago
        GIMP does not even have a circle tool, and I don't think working around pointless limitations like that counts as "learning the interface." The commenter above you used the software for 15+ years and specifically cited that lack of feature parity is the only criticism keeping them on CC. I have used both as well and do not follow your opinion about Photoshop, maybe because I never used those old school design tools. To me it looks like an Adobe UI. Overall I just don't understand how you read the comments above and determined the solution is to learn the interface - honestly, the most tired and uninformed defense of GIMP there is. Especially when your primary criticism of Photoshop was... The interface. I guess the argument could be made you eventually get used to working around inexplicable deficiencies like above, but switching to GIMP is not possible if you need the features only included in Photoshop. There's not some random cosmic reason Blender and Inkscape are considered healthy competitors in their respective domains but not GIMP.
        tomc1985 9y ago
        I like how you use more words to explaining (what you think) I think than I spent writing the original opinions. I don't have strong criticisms against either... Photoshop did take a while to learn -- I remember struggling to complete tasks when I first started with it because my frame of reference was Paint Shop Pro -- and GIMP also takes a while to learn. Why do you feel so strongly against 'learning the interface'? That "tired and uninformed defense" is also... what you must do. Why is everyone so afraid of learning?? Fucking wimps. You have a problem, you google it, repeat til you know the product. SO HARD!
    - s73ver 9y ago
      People have said that, but they can only mention the one feature. That, from what others have said, didn't work very well on GIMP, but worked well on Photoshop.
bb88 9y ago
1. It took forever to get to more than 8 bits per channel. 2. ... I could list 4 other points, but really it's just about that one. Photoshop has had 16 bits per channel since 1992 when version 2.5 was released. That's what... 25 YEARS! Gimp is FINALLY 16bit per channel now in 2017 with their latest beta.

dsego 9y ago

There was nothing wrong with Windows 95.

crispyambulance 9y ago

GIMP is perfectly fine (for many use-cases), but its not what you or I think that matters. Perhaps the best person to ask is a photoshop user who actually paid for it?

rgbrenner 9y ago
I pay for creative suite. GIMP is very far behind. There are many significant core features missing, and many tools missing that make it difficult and time consuming to use. It would be more accurate to call it 'advanced paint' than photoshop. CS is expensive and I use a small part of its features... if GIMP covered just 25% of what photoshop could do, I would use it. But I think the only people who think GIMP is close to replacing it are those that have never used/learned photoshop.
- tomc1985 9y ago
  Do you really use GIMP? Because I don't think you use it very much if you think that it is a quarter of Photoshop. Adobe regularly copies features from the GIMP, like content-aware fill
  - rgbrenner 9y ago
    I'm well aware of the status of GIMP. I first used it 15+ years ago. I used it for many years before buying PS. I last used it maybe 6 months ago. I like to check it out occasionally when my CS subscription is up for renewal. I actually pay, not just for CS, but an entire Windows computer to run it. The rest of my computers run Linux, and I use open source software everywhere. I would absolutely love to switch to GIMP, if it were at all possible.
    - tomc1985 9y ago
      Well, GIMP's interface is definitely different from PS. And I wouldn't argue better... But PS is the only program I have ever had to take a class in to be productive in, as it was clearly built to be familiar to people with very clearly-formed ideas about workflow, e.g. old-school photography and design folks. And switching to GIMP is possible methinks, you just have to learn the interface. Just like Photoshop...
      - mustacheemperor 9y ago
        GIMP does not even have a circle tool, and I don't think working around pointless limitations like that counts as "learning the interface." The commenter above you used the software for 15+ years and specifically cited that lack of feature parity is the only criticism keeping them on CC. I have used both as well and do not follow your opinion about Photoshop, maybe because I never used those old school design tools. To me it looks like an Adobe UI. Overall I just don't understand how you read the comments above and determined the solution is to learn the interface - honestly, the most tired and uninformed defense of GIMP there is. Especially when your primary criticism of Photoshop was... The interface. I guess the argument could be made you eventually get used to working around inexplicable deficiencies like above, but switching to GIMP is not possible if you need the features only included in Photoshop. There's not some random cosmic reason Blender and Inkscape are considered healthy competitors in their respective domains but not GIMP.
        tomc1985 9y ago
        I like how you use more words to explaining (what you think) I think than I spent writing the original opinions. I don't have strong criticisms against either... Photoshop did take a while to learn -- I remember struggling to complete tasks when I first started with it because my frame of reference was Paint Shop Pro -- and GIMP also takes a while to learn. Why do you feel so strongly against 'learning the interface'? That "tired and uninformed defense" is also... what you must do. Why is everyone so afraid of learning?? Fucking wimps. You have a problem, you google it, repeat til you know the product. SO HARD!
  - s73ver 9y ago
    People have said that, but they can only mention the one feature. That, from what others have said, didn't work very well on GIMP, but worked well on Photoshop.

bb88 9y ago

1. It took forever to get to more than 8 bits per channel. 2. ... I could list 4 other points, but really it's just about that one. Photoshop has had 16 bits per channel since 1992 when version 2.5 was released. That's what... 25 YEARS! Gimp is FINALLY 16bit per channel now in 2017 with their latest beta.