4 ms·
Photoshop is feature-complete, and the features are implemented well. For example, compare the speed of applying a 200px-radius Gaussian blur in Photoshop vs. G
by blt 9y ago
Photoshop is feature-complete, and the features are implemented well. For example, compare the speed of applying a 200px-radius Gaussian blur in Photoshop vs. Gimp.
To make an analogy with more hands-on trades: buying Photoshop is like getting the entire Snap-On tool catalog for $500. Buying Pixelmator is like getting 1/4 of the Craftsman tool catalog for $50. If you can spare the extra $450, you get a lot for your money.
Professional mechanics spend $xx,000 on Snap-On tools because they can justify the cost. Most DIY mechanics buy cheaper tools. But if the Snap-On tools only cost $500, why not get the best?
(edit: GIMP is like getting the entire Harbor Freight tool catalog for free.)
Also, most instructional material for image editing assumes Photoshop.
- nugi 9y agoSlightly OT, however; Pros buy snap on because of convenience. Most know there are cheaper, better made tools available for the last 25 years. The tool trucks, and big lines of credit, and bling factor are their only remaining upsells. The 'made in usa' stamps are even disappearing from their tools as more come from tiawan and china. It is hard, if not impossible, to justify the markup without some huge ego stroking, tradition and deliberate lack of comparison shopping.
- blt 9y agoTrue. Their lines of credit even feel somewhat predatory to me, especially wrt tool storage. I am not a mechanic though.
- chasedehan 9y agoI really don't understand the amount of money spent on those tools. My cousin is a mechanic and has a $10K MAC tool box(similar to Snap On) - that's just for the box without a single tool. Apparently he has >$25K in total in his tool box. We really have it quite good in tech.