3 ms·

what about Gimp and Inkscape for alternatives? Both are free software. Gimp - Raster Graphics - http://www.gimp.org/ http://www.gimp.org/ Inkscape - Vector Gra

by shaddyz 13y ago

what about Gimp and Inkscape for alternatives? Both are free software. Gimp - Raster Graphics - http://www.gimp.org/ http://www.gimp.org/ Inkscape - Vector Graphics - http://inkscape.org/ http://inkscape.org/

kunai 13y ago
Gimp is really one of the most incredible pieces of open-source/free software I have used. But, it's primary advantages (open source, powerful) are what have led to its limited use. Like many open source projects, the interface is designed pragmatically, like emacs or vi, but this is a problem -- no professional has the time or the money to learn a complex UI. The same goes for LibreOffice. Extremely powerful with a ton of untapped potential, but untapped nevertheless due to a dated and unintuitive UI. Inkscape and Scribus are better in this regard, and I've seen many professionals use them with outstanding results. I've been able to create vectors with Inkscape without much difficulty. I can't say the same about Gimp. If someone really had the time and the dedication, they could re-engineer the entire frontend of Gimp from scratch for each platform, while leaving the excellent backend in place, but I doubt any sane individual would be able to do so without the help of the original developers due to the lack of full documentation available. Still, it's worth trying. It's got 90% of the features of Ps but with 100% fewer dollars paid for it.
- krapp 13y ago
  I had to use Gimp professionally once (long story short, a sudden web banner EMERGENCY came up and Gimp was all I had available) and it was terrible. I don't doubt it would've been easier and less painful had I been familiar with the UI but it just seemed so poorly designed. It is the best free graphics software out there, maybe, but it's hardly a worthy replacement for photoshop yet (although it is getting better.)
  - douglasheriot 13y ago
    Yep.
- pserwylo 13y ago
  I think that it is more of an issue with conditioning. As you and others have mentioned, one could indeed learn Gimp's UI with enough practice. However, I'd say that someone who picked up Photoshop, or MS Word, or any complex piece of software for the first time, then it would be a horrible UI. The education system (at least here in Australia) heavily focuses on Adobe and Microsoft products, so high school kids are familiar with them from a youngish age. If they were taught general principles of word processing or photo editing, perhaps with a few different programs, then I feel that everybody would be better able to cope with different UI's much more easily. Incidentally, (as a non-professional) I found Gimp much easier to grok than Inkscape or Scribus (coming from a Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign education/background).
  - airtonix 13y ago
    It's probably the same in other countries but to provide some perspective on the situation: A teacher will say "Microsoft Word" and not "Word Processor". When and if you refer to the software as "Word Processor" and not "Microsoft Word" said teacher generally gets upset or confused. Same goes for Spreadsheet, Presentation and Database.
  - greggman 13y ago
    It's not just a UI issues. Gimp is missing features I use in Photoshop all the time. live real time Layer Effects are one of my most used features in Photoshop. Without them I can't get work done. AFAIK gIMP has no similar feature.
- drivingmenuts 13y ago
  It's that godawful UI that kills it for me. It's plenty powerful and since I don't do print anymore, having or not having CMYK doesn't really matter as much. But I'm not going to waste the time learning a UI that's not native to any platform when platform alternatives are available. One might be able to say the same thing of PS, but it has the weight of history and industry acceptance behind it. Also, the name is not liable to cause embarrassment in some circles. At least PS is a marketable name. But mostly it's that UI.
  - airtonix 13y ago
    The UI is native to Linux based Operating Systems using a GTK based Desktop Environment (Gnome Shell, Ubuntu Unity and a few others). Honestly, I've used both for about as long as each other, I find both to be equally annoying to use. Much prefer to use Inkscape or Fireworks, but fireworks doesn't come installable as a Deb and doesn't work natively on a Linux based Operating System so I don't care for it.
- lmm 13y ago
  I feel like Krita is unfairly overshadowed by Gimp; Gimp is probably more powerful for advanced use cases, but Krita has a much more familiar UI and I've found it perfectly adequate for home use.

by shaddyz 13y ago

kunai 13y ago

Gimp is really one of the most incredible pieces of open-source/free software I have used. But, it's primary advantages (open source, powerful) are what have led to its limited use. Like many open source projects, the interface is designed pragmatically, like emacs or vi, but this is a problem -- no professional has the time or the money to learn a complex UI. The same goes for LibreOffice. Extremely powerful with a ton of untapped potential, but untapped nevertheless due to a dated and unintuitive UI. Inkscape and Scribus are better in this regard, and I've seen many professionals use them with outstanding results. I've been able to create vectors with Inkscape without much difficulty. I can't say the same about Gimp. If someone really had the time and the dedication, they could re-engineer the entire frontend of Gimp from scratch for each platform, while leaving the excellent backend in place, but I doubt any sane individual would be able to do so without the help of the original developers due to the lack of full documentation available. Still, it's worth trying. It's got 90% of the features of Ps but with 100% fewer dollars paid for it.

krapp 13y ago
I had to use Gimp professionally once (long story short, a sudden web banner EMERGENCY came up and Gimp was all I had available) and it was terrible. I don't doubt it would've been easier and less painful had I been familiar with the UI but it just seemed so poorly designed. It is the best free graphics software out there, maybe, but it's hardly a worthy replacement for photoshop yet (although it is getting better.)
- douglasheriot 13y ago
  Yep.
pserwylo 13y ago
I think that it is more of an issue with conditioning. As you and others have mentioned, one could indeed learn Gimp's UI with enough practice. However, I'd say that someone who picked up Photoshop, or MS Word, or any complex piece of software for the first time, then it would be a horrible UI. The education system (at least here in Australia) heavily focuses on Adobe and Microsoft products, so high school kids are familiar with them from a youngish age. If they were taught general principles of word processing or photo editing, perhaps with a few different programs, then I feel that everybody would be better able to cope with different UI's much more easily. Incidentally, (as a non-professional) I found Gimp much easier to grok than Inkscape or Scribus (coming from a Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign education/background).
- airtonix 13y ago
  It's probably the same in other countries but to provide some perspective on the situation: A teacher will say "Microsoft Word" and not "Word Processor". When and if you refer to the software as "Word Processor" and not "Microsoft Word" said teacher generally gets upset or confused. Same goes for Spreadsheet, Presentation and Database.
- greggman 13y ago
  It's not just a UI issues. Gimp is missing features I use in Photoshop all the time. live real time Layer Effects are one of my most used features in Photoshop. Without them I can't get work done. AFAIK gIMP has no similar feature.
drivingmenuts 13y ago
It's that godawful UI that kills it for me. It's plenty powerful and since I don't do print anymore, having or not having CMYK doesn't really matter as much. But I'm not going to waste the time learning a UI that's not native to any platform when platform alternatives are available. One might be able to say the same thing of PS, but it has the weight of history and industry acceptance behind it. Also, the name is not liable to cause embarrassment in some circles. At least PS is a marketable name. But mostly it's that UI.
- airtonix 13y ago
  The UI is native to Linux based Operating Systems using a GTK based Desktop Environment (Gnome Shell, Ubuntu Unity and a few others). Honestly, I've used both for about as long as each other, I find both to be equally annoying to use. Much prefer to use Inkscape or Fireworks, but fireworks doesn't come installable as a Deb and doesn't work natively on a Linux based Operating System so I don't care for it.
lmm 13y ago
I feel like Krita is unfairly overshadowed by Gimp; Gimp is probably more powerful for advanced use cases, but Krita has a much more familiar UI and I've found it perfectly adequate for home use.