Comparing GIMP and Photoshop

[chansard 0]

Who knows Gimp and Photoshop enough to compare booth tools?

[aliem 0]

These Programs does the same thing.All of they have a tangled guiThe same powerfull functionsthe Gimp have scripting interfaceThe Gimp is Free Software it costs about ... a donation if you likePhotoshop is a propetary program, it costs about 500$

[iGuest 3]

Who knows Gimp and Photoshop enough to compare booth tools?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I use the GIMP 2.0.4 for Linux, Photoshop 7 for Windows.

 

Comparison, well they both do exactly what I need and I can't really compare them other than they both have different ways for doing one thing than another, Photoshop maybe easier to navigate, due to spending more time around Windows than Linux but in the end, they both do what I want and I can't complain. Photoshop 7 takes a lot longer time to load on Windows though.

 

I had to learn GIMP, which I didn't mind, considering that I've dedicated most my work on Linux now.

 

They are both powerful graphic programs and if I had to choose one over the other, I would have to say GIMP as cost wise should be considered in this, as they both perform the same things, or can perform the same. A simple graphic alteration should not take forever to load in my opinion and Photoshop uses quite a lot of resources.

 

SYSTEM SPECS of both machines (used only for animation/graphics)

 

Dual PIII 1GHz

2GB SDRAM PC133

GeForce FX6800 GT AGP 8x 256MB GDDR

200GB ATA133 HDD 8MB Cache

 

 

Cheers, MC

[marijnnn 0]

personally, i'd stick to photoshop. but that's just because i'm used to it. and i don't like the seperate windows in gimp. and how most of the tools are only reachable by rightclick.and i like the fact that it's easy to find brushes and stuff for ps+ it's more user friendly+ more ready-to-use effectsbut gimp is indeed less heavy for your computer. it's powerfull, but you have to do more on your own. well, i'm not really sure. i haven't really tried to master it as i've got ps and i don't feel the need to learn gimp.one thing i like about ps is how you can make slices with imageready and then export it to a html table! that's really cool!

[marijnnn 0]

hm, i was working in linux last night and tried out gimp again. i didn't know they had a version 2! it rocks! really. so much better than version 1i guess you'll still find more brushes and filters on the net for ps, but gimp has improved a lot. if you want to stay legal and you make your brushes & filters yourself, and want to save a lot of money, gimp is really cool!

[r3d1405241470 0]

there is a big difference, the price

[jcguy 0]

there is a big difference, the price

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly, for the rest of us who cannot afford the hundreds of bucks for Photoshop, GIMP is a very good tool that more or less has the same functions as PS but is free.

[Sundari Harmony 0]

Well, someone recommended GIMP to me, but personally I still really want Photoshop. The GIMP to me is hard to navigate, and I'd just be better off with Photoshop. I don't like how it's seperated and everything .. I don't know, it's just confusing. Then when you try to open a file, you have to know the exact name because it doesn't show a preview, so that kind of sucks.

[Animator 0]

There are a number of significant differences between the two.Importantly for professionals, the Gimp does not yet have the colour handling capabilities of Photoshop. This is barely relevant to anyone using Gimp for home / personal use though.While Gimp has a layering system similar to Photoshop, it does not have folders for those layers. This is very restricting in that Gimp users have to apply effects & filters to layers one at a time, whereas Photoshop users are able to bung the wanted layers into a folder and then apply said effect to that folder. It's also essential when handing work (which may have many many layers) to other professionals... you want all the layers for the "house" to be separated into a common folder. Otherwise they have to "hide" every single layer of the house one by one (window layer, door, shadow etc).Brushes in Photoshop are vastly more adaptable. They are all immediately resizable (Gimp can also resize but needs a slider or the user has to jump through a few hoops to assign a keypress to the size options of brush tools). Gimp brush manipulations include rotation and a few others neat features.Available scripts / effects are of course different in each package.I really wish Gimp development would hurry up and add folders to the layer window.I prefer / use Gimp in my day to day use as it is Open Source. I'd be a fool to say it was better than PhotoShop. PhotoShop is simply more advanced.

[Jeigh1405241495 0]

I feel I need to point out, in case anyone stumbles onto this post now that it has been resurrected that many of the early posts are dated 2004, so comments made in regards to GIMP or photoshop could be heavily different from what is currently true or they could even be completely false in regards to the most recent versions. Carry on

[Atomic0 0]

I feel that Adobe Photoshop is more suited to my own needs. Also, since I have been using Adobe Photoshop for a very long time, it is easier for me to use the functions in Adobe Photoshop than to have to learn how to use GIMP. In terms of cost, it sort of doesn't cost that much especially if you purchase an education or student version of it.In conclusion, I believe Adobe Photoshop is more 'professional' in its interface and functions compared to the more lightweight GIMP graphics editor.

[Ahsaniqbalkmc 0]

Who knows Gimp and Photoshop enough to compare booth tools?

In few simple words, GIMP is a free image editor that can be used instead of Photoshop if you don't need the professional tools that are exclusive to photoshop. On the other hand, adobe photoshop is the most brilliant image editor available in the market. It has got everything in it. The only problem with this brilliant tool is its price which cannot be afforded by every one. That is why people tend to go for cheaper or open source tools. If the price of adobe photoshop drops, miraculously is becomes free, you will see it installed on every personal computer where at least some image editing is carried out.

[Xamire 0]

Gimp, and Adobe Photoshop are comparatively the same. While Photoshop costs, quite a bit, and Gimp is open source, so it's free - that's the kicker!Photoshop does have a few extra goodies (depending on what version you purchased) but the extrasare usually worthless to all but a few specialty designers. There is another photo and image manipulation software, that's also open source,and thats Krita. I have not used it, but have heard that its quite a mature program. Overall I think Gimp is the better option. I feel it's more simplistic in it's design, whichhelps users (especially first time learners) adapt to the overwhelming buttons, contextual menus, and tools. Gimp takes up less space, both screen wise, as well as ram, and hard drive. But like I said.. the biggest of all is because it's free! Open source is a great advancement for developers, and designers.

[manuleka 0]

for a designer, depending on how sophisticated and complex the work need done, both tools are great in their own respect. although if one needs to do very complex work Photoshop would be the way to go, but Gimp can take you on alot of work as well...free doesn't mean it's not as good, some designers use Gimp because of price FREE one can do alot with Gimp, for webdesigning i use Gimp

[loremar 0]

I don't know a lot about Photoshop because I never used once. I'm using gimp because its free. Though I think it has limited features but it has enough decent features to say that you do a lot of job around using gimp. Though my problem with gimp is its path curves because the points are to big it actually obstructs your drawing. With gimp you can actually do a lot with several supported image types. You can even create gif images from gimp. I really like its layer tools because its easy to use.