Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Software > Editors (Photoshop, Vegas, Final Cut Pro, Kdenlive, etc.)

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 18, 2005, 3:00 PM   #1
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 251

Have a friend who recently told me to quit using photoshop and change to Gimp. Gimp was, according to him, faster AND better (more tools).

So, how do you respond to that? It sounds ridiculous to me. How do they compare to each other? I dont care about user friendly or prices or such. Just, how do they compare to each other when it comes to speed and quality (tools and such)? What can photoshop do that gimp cant, and vice versa.
LCohen is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 18, 2005, 3:56 PM   #2
Senior Member
photosbyvito's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710

well, imo, photoshop is an unending program..
i dunno if gimp has the 'depth' like photoshop..

the basic tools might be better though...
there's a reason one's free and one's 700 bucks though..
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12, 2005, 2:10 PM   #3
Junior Member
eburrows's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24

I'm a Linux user, and have been using The Gimp for many years, and I like it very much. However, I've never used Photoshop, so I can't compare. A quick google did return a couple of interesting comparisons:


It seems the consensus is that Photoshop is still the king, and with good reason, Adobe has a larger development team, and better industrial support, but the Gimp is still an excellent alternative.

Give it a try, I installed the windows version of Gimp on my mom's computer, and it worked very well, and that was two years ago.

eburrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2005, 9:30 AM   #4
Senior Member
memento's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 145

I think PS is king for the same reason MS is king with Windows. People are comfortable with it and don't want to change. I switched to Gimp and have never looked back. On OSX, there is a Gimp version that has rearranged and renamed menus so that they mirror PS. nice. The money saved alone is worth the effort of learning the relatively minor differences (minor to me). I do understand that there are differences that may effect print houses. Something on the order of no CMYK support or something. It means nothing to me since I don't print. If I want prints or common corrections (like crop, B&W, sepia, sharpness, color, exposure, histogram, etc) I use iPhoto and order through that, which uses Kodak.

For me, gimp does everything I need it to, in the same way as PS, and for free. You can see the gimp documentation here: http://www.gimp.org/docs/
memento is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 14, 2005, 2:02 PM   #5
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 52

I have used both extensively. I think there is a huge gap between Photoshop and the Gimp. I am a huge proponent of open source and run Linux on all my machines by default, but my main machine is dual boot, because I NEED Photoshop. I am even happy with PS Elements 3. There is nothing that compares. The Gimp is very powerful and is kind of like one or two releases behind Photoshop. The thing I do not like is there are not as many easy to use tools. I like to be able to quickly do things in Elements and if need be open up Photoshop to do more involved editing. Perfect example is a friend wanted me to print out some photos from a school trip that our children went on. I was able to get rid of the red eye and do some quick adjustments that would have taken 100 times longer in the Gimp. The Gimp is a very powerful editor but ease of use is not there. The other reason for dual boot is the fact that the video and print drivers are not any ware as good as under Windows. As much as I hate Windows it is far more frustrating trying to get Linux to print out any decent output. It is very difficult to match the monitor to the poor print output. I cannot get my Epson to print out on photo quality at all. It has severe banding, and poor colors.

The bottom line is:

The Gimp good free program, but not in the class of Photoshop CS or even Elements. The one good thing is if you are on limited hardware, such as my laptop (PIII 600Mz ½ gig ram), it is a great solution running Linux. Just don't try to do exact color matching, or printing from it.

So if you have Photoshop it would be a downgrade to switch to the Gimp. Don't get caught up in the "hype" of free open source. It can be great, but usually takes much more time.
miatapaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 15, 2005, 10:05 AM   #6
Senior Member
memento's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 145

good points on the ease of use. For me I do the quick PS things that you mentioned with iPhoto. I can't see spending the huge $$$ for PS. Elements might be a different story, but since I use iPhoto for my photo library and it does the common corrections already, I'm set. As for the drivers, etc you can download the Gimp for windows. No need to compile, it's a binary installation.

So we're saying the same thing about the Gimp. It's good to use another program for the quick simple retouches. PS for you and iPhoto for me.
memento is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:43 AM.