Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
Forum Moderators: not2easy
Thanks, limbo, gimp is the only one that I've heard of too. I wonder how it compares to photoshop.
In my view and speaking from experience,
Photoshop and Gimp are incomparable.
Surfin2u, I recommend you read some articles on the topic (many comparisons available) and I am sure you will get the reasons of my position above.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. It would be helpful to hear directly from you why you feel the way that you do, if you wouldn't mind saying.
Sure I don't mind sharing, of course.
To be much more concise in my feedback, I'll dare to quote an opinion
that I fully support. The main point is that
"The winner for commercial use is, by no doubt,Photoshop.
The winner for home use – The Gimp."
But it is again a matter of personal choice and experience. Once you've had scrutinized both Gimp and Photoshop, you'd end up with a conclusion of your own.
However I have test GIMP's functionality and It's definitely worth giving it a go - what have you to lose? - it's open source!
You can happily optimise images, control contrast, colour, levels - it has layers, swatches, drawing selections tools and filters you can crop, enhance and export as most file types.
It's a very appealing package to those on a shoestring.
The other option is Photoshop-Elements - a rather tasty offering from Adobe that has most of the functions an hobbyist would need at a fraction of the price of it's older brother.
One thing it apparently doesn't support is CMYK & no Pantone swatches. This renders it (nearly) useless as a tool for print - but I imagine there is a plugin for that too.
One thing it apparently doesn't support is CMYK & no Pantone swatches. This renders it (nearly) useless as a tool for print - but I imagine there is a plugin for that too
I would be interested to hear if this is the case, particularly in CMYK conversion. :-)
The CLUT's (Color lookup tables) for an RGB to CMYK conversion are pretty carefully guarded by Adobe, and rightfully so. Their color lookup tables are the most flexible and powerful ones in use by the graphics industry, involving complex and robust gray component replacement and under color removal, across a variety of printing stock profiles and ink standards. The only ones that come close and excel are proprietary tables by Scitex and Dainippon Screen. This is deeply integrated into adjustment for Postscript output as well.
In The Beginning there was a program called Color Studio we used for a while, eventually bought by Corel (I think.) A close comparison of CMYK outputs quickly revealed its inferiority.
If you need quality output for printing, you will want to use Photoshop.
I work on a team and the guy that handles the font end graphics uses the latest photoshop. For the graphic professional Im sure some of the more adv techniques are used.
So basically Im saying that if you are an all around web developer then full blown latest photoshop may not be neccessary, however if your main focus is graphics and front end then you may find some advantages.
For me, Elements does what I need. Tho yes, not images directly to printers; for that, can go via graphics specialists (but prints on Epson photo printer excellent).
Before i used Photoshop 5.5 for about 5 years. But sinds 2 years im over on The GIMP.
And i have to say im more than happy with this free killer product. IMO it is better than Photoshop 5.5 :) You have to work a lot with it to become a GIMP expert but it is worth the money!
I'm just Gimped
We are Gimps
The GIMP is great, but does take a little while to get used to when moving from Photoshop.
I've also tried a donation-ware clone of photoshop called Pixel. Absolutely terrible, I would stay well away from it. I think it managed to open 1 out of 8 photoshop files that I'd previously saved!
Am just downloading paint.net now, that sounds really interesting and looks pretty good from the screenshots!
Although it isn't free, how does the Corel Draw package compare to Photoshop? It's about half the price but seems fairly decent. Has anyone used it?
I've been happy with PSP, but since I work mainly with graphics - as opposed to photos - I haven't bothered with the recent updates. For photo work, the latest releases have been getting very good reviews; any negative comments have mostly been from us graphics folks grumbling about being ignored. (ETA: I haven't grumbled enough yet to buy Paint, so I can't give an opinion on that - it leans toward the "artistic" natural media-type use.)
[edited by: Beagle at 2:24 pm (utc) on Mar. 5, 2007]
You won't get pro-level OSS graphics software, simply because all the good algorithms are patented up the yin-yang.
I remember a good Pascal app in the eighties that was developed for medical imaging, and that was the last "pro-level" OSS app I've seen.
You will be able to get quite a few "sub-pro" packages, but you just won't be able to get the speed and accuracy of a pro app without forking over some duckets for a compiled binary.