I've used Photoshop this entire time. However, I just tested the latest version of TheGIMP for about 15 minutes (on windows XP), and it appeared to have the same functionality as Photoshop, and the menus seemed more intuitive. The best part though, is TheGIMP is 100% FREE.
I know paint.net is also free, but I have yet to try it out.
Does anyone have primary experience with Photoshop and one (or both) of these other two? If so, can you share your inputs on which you prefer and why?
Many thanks in advance.
I've used photoshop and The Gimp for years. For light tweaking I'd say stick with The Gimp, but if you're doing anything that needs fine tune snipping and tipping, more control over the brushes etc. then go for photoshop. No idea with Paint.Net. I've heard that it can be really awkward for a new user.
Quote from: PG on March 21, 2008, 04:50:22 PM
I've used photoshop and The Gimp for years. For light tweaking I'd say stick with The Gimp, but if you're doing anything that needs fine tune snipping and tipping, more control over the brushes etc. then go for photoshop. No idea with Paint.Net. I've heard that it can be really awkward for a new user.
I agree with PG
Yaay ;D
I'm downloading Paint.NET now so I'll be able to tell you first hand what it's like.
Edit, did some quick edit work with it. It has many of the tweakables that Photoshop has, more advanced tweaking controls than The Gimp but not quite as in depth as photoshop. The interface is almost trying to be 1/3 windows, 1/3 mac and 1/3 linux. It is a bit annoying at first. It's basically a glorified version of Paint. As a free in between it's good but I'd still say stick with Photoshop.
Raving on so much I almost forgot, here's what I did in Paint.NET. It doesn't really have much in the way of balance. It either has no real visible effect or it looks stupid. All I could do here was decrease luminance and fiddle with zoom blur. Most of the filters just plastered over the image
I like Paint.Net, but it doesn't have all of the capabilities of PS. Not sure about Gimp. What I like about Paint.Net is twofold - Some things are more intuitive even than PS and the Levels and Curves seems easier to adjust.
On a tangent: Whats up with all these weird names for hardware and software lately? TheGIMP reminds me of some poor old guy cruising around with a permanently bent leg. ;D
Atleast we can chuckle as we use the thing.
And the Intel processor Nehalem - sounds like someone just cleared their throat! ;D But weird names aside, they should kick ass.
Yes. These names are obviously made by people who never go outside and play on their <ahem> computers all day. :P
I use Gimp a lot. I have Photoshop elements on a disk somewhere but never installed it. I have used Photoshop in the past but I think Gimp is brilliant. I notice the latest version has vastly improved selection manipulation amongst other improvements with the selections. A great ink brush as well. You have to get used to Gimp. It does the same things as Photoshop but it's UI is totally different. Once you know where everything is then you really don't need anything else for basic image editing but for photos and renders I do most of the post for colours, levels etc in Lightzone. I think that's a great app. Everything is in a stack that does not destructively change the image in a way that makes it difficult to go back so you can work on all processing at once. You can fine tune balances between certain processing that would not be at all easy in another app. Because of this it hammers your CPU and RAM, understandably, but this is worth the hassle. It's totally visual and that means you get better results because you use your eyes. I've also just started using Cinepaint because it handles 16 bit photo images. This is also a cool app. Based on an earlier version of Gimp. Cinepaint does not have such a nice interface. You have to learn it more but for basics it works great but crucially, both these apps fly on Linux. There is a Lightzone Linux version as well so a lot of my image editing is done on that OS now. Unfortunately some bugs have crept into Lightzone Linux so I've been temporarily back on the Mac.
My knowledge of postwork tools is pretty limited, but I find the Gimp interface to be so irritating as to render the app worthless. I quickly arrive at the point that I don't care WHAT it's capabilites are; if the interface is such a pain to use, what difference does it make?
No, I'm a believer in UI standards. The GIMP and it's ilk might be cute, but to me, anyway, it's presentation is such a pain to deal with that any potential usefullness is lost in the UI noise.
This is what I thought about Gimp to begin with. It seems cumbersome. All the windows etc but now I fly with it. There is a lot to learn with the UI, mainly because it's different. Some people want the windows to be docked but now I see that this would not be beneficial because it would actually limit the app. Also. small issues like the tools being in a separate window that doesn't float above the others suddenly make more sense when you're on Linux because you can instantly make any window stay on top. Then you have separate desktops on Linux so you can drag a window onto another desktop. It all makes more sense.
I think several apps on Linux area demonstrations of why it's sometimes good to not go with conventions in UI which is what proprietary companies need to think about. Gimp, Blender and Wings 3D are examples. They initially seem awkward because they are different but not because they are bad.
Just another point. I'm on Linux here so I've got the latest Gimp. The UI is improved. The menus are a lot better arranged.
I don't think any other program is better than Photoshop, the advantage of GIMP and Paint. Net are the free cost, and unless you're doing pro work, they are good enough for hobby photographers.
It's actually funny that I bought a simple little XP-Pen drawing pad (https://www.xp-pen.com/) for 30 bucks and now I have photoshop elements and all that jazz that comes with the tablet. I find that's also a good way to save money and get a good program.