6 ms·

I'm not a frequent user of Photoshop, so I was wondering what it does that Krita doesn't? (Or gimp)

Tomte 2y ago
Photo editing. Krita is for painting.
nicce 2y ago
User interface. Seriously. The efficiency of these tools is not measured by the capabilities, but by the effort it takes from the user to get the expected end result.
- jrvieira 2y ago
  I used Affinity tools as a better alternative. Are they not a player anymore?
- kyriakos 2y ago
  Same goes for Lightroom, many competitors, none of them has the full feature package that Lightroom Classic has.
  - DeathArrow 2y ago
    I can use DXO Photolab or Capture One Pro or even ON1 Photo Raw or Skylum Luninar instead of Lightroom. It's Photoshop I can't replace with something else.
- bogwog 2y ago
  All open source software gets endless amounts of vitriol and hate from people who are used to their particular commercial tool and aren't willing to learn a new way to work. Blender is probably the prime example of this. I think this is the biggest problem with FOSS alternatives, and it's a people problem (the type of problem FOSS devs are rarely equipped to solve). It doesn't matter what the technical merits of Krita or Blender or whatever are, because the same complaints from the same people will never go away. The only reasonable way forward is to ignore that demographic of people and their complaints, and just focus on doing their own thing. This isn't a new phenomenon, it has always been this way. If you're a professional who uses Photoshop in their daily work, consider that maybe your assessment of FOSS alternatives isn't fair, and try dedicating some time to learning a new workflow with new tools with an open mind. If you're not willing to do that much, then you're going to be stuck with Adobe forever, and will be forever grouchy.
  - DeathArrow 2y ago
    >The only reasonable way forward is to ignore that demographic of people and their complaints, and just focus on doing their own thing. Sure, if they don't want to have users.
  - robenkleene 2y ago
    > This isn't a new phenomenon, it has always been this way. If you're a professional who uses Photoshop in their daily work, consider that maybe your assessment of FOSS alternatives isn't fair, and try dedicating some time to learning a new workflow with new tools with an open mind. If you're not willing to do that much, then you're going to be stuck with Adobe forever, and will be forever grouchy. If you think folks haven't done this, then you're not paying attention. They've tried that and failed. That's the whole problem, they're failing to migrate to the open source options. That we can just take as a given, look if you can't compete with Adobe in 2024, then you're not ready to be at the table yet. There have never been better conditions to compete in these areas than there are right now. Note that none of your complaints hold up with Blender, sure I occasionally see folks suggest that Blender's UI is a bit janky. But the overwhelming sentiment in creative circles toward Blender is heartfelt gratitude that application exists and is so capable. From my own personal observations, I'd put Blender as one of the most loved GUI applications in existence today. I'd even go as far as to say Blender is over loved, I don't think it gets enough pushback for not having a dedicated GPU-renderer which is tablestakes feature today. So I'd actual say your entire point is actually inversed, FOSS gets too much leeway for being less capable because folks value the FOSS (and free-as-in-beer) points too much, which causes the software to be recommended in contexts where it really shouldn't be yet.
    - edanm 2y ago
      Blender is an even better counterexample, because it had a truly terrible GUI that everyone complained about, worked hard at it, launched a new version with a much better GUI that made things much closer to how commercial apps do it, and this helped it tremendously. Now, it is beloved and used fairly widely throughout industry. (Note: I'm not a 3d professional, though I am somewhat connected to it. I am mostly observing the community from the outside, so if I'm wrong about this I'll welcome the correction.)
cowsaymoo 2y ago
Use photopea.com It's an open source near perfect clone of photoshop
gjsman-1000 2y ago
[flagged]
- mebassett 2y ago
  > In the case of GIMP, the very name itself means it cannot be used in commercial enterprises. I have no idea where you got this info from but it is 100% wrong. Of course GIMP can be used for commercial purposes. Or any purposes you want, really. The GNU GPL does not prevent commercial use. see also https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#can-i-use-gimp-commercially https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#can-i-use-gimp-commer...
  - gjsman-1000 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - seszett 2y ago
      It probably depend on your environment I guess. Nobody bats an eye when we say we edited their pictures with GIMP. Even our British customers, who are more likely to understand what "gimp" means, I guess. I mean, they already often use mac OS after all, which means pimp, in French. And who cares.
  - ajoseps 2y ago
    pretty sure OP meant the naming itself of GIMP is poor and hard to sell in an enterprise environment
- nicce 2y ago
  > (There's also the fact that any professional image editor, paid specifically to do image editing, will tell you GIMP is a toy.) To be fair, this is because they are, ironically, professional image editors. GIMP has historically very bad GUI. This is common in open-source projects, where technical people develop the software based on the capabilities. There is rarely UI/UX designer in the project that makes sure that average Joe can do the thing as well. So, technical people likely would disagree with these professional image editors, and they could demonstrate the same end-results with GIMP as these professionals do with other software. Professionals just had no idea how to.

Photo editing. Krita is for painting.

User interface. Seriously. The efficiency of these tools is not measured by the capabilities, but by the effort it takes from the user to get the expected end result.

jrvieira 2y ago
I used Affinity tools as a better alternative. Are they not a player anymore?
kyriakos 2y ago
Same goes for Lightroom, many competitors, none of them has the full feature package that Lightroom Classic has.
- DeathArrow 2y ago
  I can use DXO Photolab or Capture One Pro or even ON1 Photo Raw or Skylum Luninar instead of Lightroom. It's Photoshop I can't replace with something else.
bogwog 2y ago
All open source software gets endless amounts of vitriol and hate from people who are used to their particular commercial tool and aren't willing to learn a new way to work. Blender is probably the prime example of this. I think this is the biggest problem with FOSS alternatives, and it's a people problem (the type of problem FOSS devs are rarely equipped to solve). It doesn't matter what the technical merits of Krita or Blender or whatever are, because the same complaints from the same people will never go away. The only reasonable way forward is to ignore that demographic of people and their complaints, and just focus on doing their own thing. This isn't a new phenomenon, it has always been this way. If you're a professional who uses Photoshop in their daily work, consider that maybe your assessment of FOSS alternatives isn't fair, and try dedicating some time to learning a new workflow with new tools with an open mind. If you're not willing to do that much, then you're going to be stuck with Adobe forever, and will be forever grouchy.
- DeathArrow 2y ago
  >The only reasonable way forward is to ignore that demographic of people and their complaints, and just focus on doing their own thing. Sure, if they don't want to have users.
- robenkleene 2y ago
  > This isn't a new phenomenon, it has always been this way. If you're a professional who uses Photoshop in their daily work, consider that maybe your assessment of FOSS alternatives isn't fair, and try dedicating some time to learning a new workflow with new tools with an open mind. If you're not willing to do that much, then you're going to be stuck with Adobe forever, and will be forever grouchy. If you think folks haven't done this, then you're not paying attention. They've tried that and failed. That's the whole problem, they're failing to migrate to the open source options. That we can just take as a given, look if you can't compete with Adobe in 2024, then you're not ready to be at the table yet. There have never been better conditions to compete in these areas than there are right now. Note that none of your complaints hold up with Blender, sure I occasionally see folks suggest that Blender's UI is a bit janky. But the overwhelming sentiment in creative circles toward Blender is heartfelt gratitude that application exists and is so capable. From my own personal observations, I'd put Blender as one of the most loved GUI applications in existence today. I'd even go as far as to say Blender is over loved, I don't think it gets enough pushback for not having a dedicated GPU-renderer which is tablestakes feature today. So I'd actual say your entire point is actually inversed, FOSS gets too much leeway for being less capable because folks value the FOSS (and free-as-in-beer) points too much, which causes the software to be recommended in contexts where it really shouldn't be yet.
  - edanm 2y ago
    Blender is an even better counterexample, because it had a truly terrible GUI that everyone complained about, worked hard at it, launched a new version with a much better GUI that made things much closer to how commercial apps do it, and this helped it tremendously. Now, it is beloved and used fairly widely throughout industry. (Note: I'm not a 3d professional, though I am somewhat connected to it. I am mostly observing the community from the outside, so if I'm wrong about this I'll welcome the correction.)

cowsaymoo 2y ago

Use photopea.com It's an open source near perfect clone of photoshop

gjsman-1000 2y ago

[flagged]

mebassett 2y ago
> In the case of GIMP, the very name itself means it cannot be used in commercial enterprises. I have no idea where you got this info from but it is 100% wrong. Of course GIMP can be used for commercial purposes. Or any purposes you want, really. The GNU GPL does not prevent commercial use. see also https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#can-i-use-gimp-commercially https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#can-i-use-gimp-commer...
- gjsman-1000 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - seszett 2y ago
    It probably depend on your environment I guess. Nobody bats an eye when we say we edited their pictures with GIMP. Even our British customers, who are more likely to understand what "gimp" means, I guess. I mean, they already often use mac OS after all, which means pimp, in French. And who cares.
- ajoseps 2y ago
  pretty sure OP meant the naming itself of GIMP is poor and hard to sell in an enterprise environment
nicce 2y ago
> (There's also the fact that any professional image editor, paid specifically to do image editing, will tell you GIMP is a toy.) To be fair, this is because they are, ironically, professional image editors. GIMP has historically very bad GUI. This is common in open-source projects, where technical people develop the software based on the capabilities. There is rarely UI/UX designer in the project that makes sure that average Joe can do the thing as well. So, technical people likely would disagree with these professional image editors, and they could demonstrate the same end-results with GIMP as these professionals do with other software. Professionals just had no idea how to.