Nothing can touch Photoshop. They pay developers good salaries to implemend new features. For people who do media prouction and photography for $150,000, they only care about time, nothing else. I will always tell them to use Mac or Windows and Photoshop to get work done in a hurry and get paid.
GIMP does not exist or is s laughing joke for people who work full time in graphic design and photo production.
Up to you, but it can benefit devs and users. I just used a bunch of telemetry about GPU hardware that came from a Stable Diffusion project. I could see what basic hardware and kernel were run by ~5000 people, determined ~700 were on Linux proper, what hardware worked, and their SD iteration times. That was helpful for deciding what hardware to buy. Also I used the Linux Hardware Probe website to see what hardware was tested and working on new machines. I highly recommend checking out that project, and scanning/submitting your hardware, especially if you are on a newer OEM machine. It is an incredible resource to use when you’re unsure what to buy.
Once I saw a video review of various Photoshop alternatives. All the guy did was just draw a face and knocked a point every time something was different then photoshop. Now changing alt+t to alt+y or what ever does take time to relearn. Which yeah it is true for him that all these programs will be slower the photoshop. But photoshop would be slower for someone that spent years learning kirta and then moved over to photoshop.
Why are the shorcuts not a simple 1 to with photoshop? Maybe language barrier, maybe just random choice from developers, maybe there is some trade or patent that photoshop has. I don’t really know.
Given enough time and practice you will relearn on the short cuts, and best way to get things done with gimp and krita.
I wish I could get over the learning curve with GIMP but tbh my current workflow involves a windows 10 virtual machine for Photoshop. It works for my needs without GPU pass through.
It’s all about transparency and giving you the choice to opt in. When it comes to KDE, you can clearly see what is being sent to help the developers. The same cannot be said for Windows and closed source software.
I absolutely love the KDE approach and I always enable telemetry for FOSS apps if I can see what exactly is being sent. Hell, I wouldn’t even mind some opt out telemetry if I could see what data the app sends back “home”. That’s, obviously, if the data sent doesn’t violate my privacy significantly
if learning gimp is such a roadblock then i doubt anything will seem good to you. it really sounds like you’re looking for a clone of photoshop, rather than an alternative to photoshop, and i don’t think such a thing exists. any reasonably complicated software will have a learning curve to it, so you may need to pick between continuing to use windows and photoshop, or putting more time than you’d rather into learning something new.
as to why there aren’t any clones of photoshop, i expect it is because it would be a lot of work, and they’d constantly be scrambling one step behind to implement whatever updates photoshop gets, so no matter how much effort was put into such a project, it’d still get viewed as a second rate copy of photoshop. if you want to make a graphics program, might as well focus on making it good and making it your own, rather than chasing adobe’s coat-tails, y’know?
They’re two different tools, yeah - I get that. But in the end, I want them to do the same thing. Think just, I’ve learned how to use a screwdriver over the years. I’m fast and efficient with the screwdriver, and I find it reliable. But now, I’m forced to learn to use a hammer. Both will, in the end, achieve similar results.
Okay, maybe I’m just going to have to learn how to use a hammer then? That would be no problem - if the hammer wasn’t such an unintuitive mess of a tool that just doesn’t work like how I would expect it to. It’s just going to take a lot of time, that I really don’t want to invest, just to “get comfortable” with the large drawbacks this hammer has.
I’m not opposed to learning a new tool. I’m opposed to learning a tool which just gets in the way, over and over.
You’re comparing brands of screwdrivers with different shapes of handles, instead of screwdrivers and hammers.
There are no alternatives that are hidden gems, they would have risen to the top. GIMP is it.
I have switched to GIMP many years ago and by now Photoshop is what feels weird. That’s simply a factor of the unknown. If you are not willing to learn a new flow, then I’m pretty sure you will disregard anything that isn’t Photoshop itself.
Perhaps install a VM in VirtualBox and set it to seamless mode.
Also worth mentioning that Windows technically cheats. When you shut down modern Windows (starting with 8 AFAIK), it doesn’t truly shut down, it logs you out to the login screen and then hibernates. So when you boot back up, it can quickly restore state which makes it come up much faster as it doesn’t have to start everything back up from scratch.
45 seconds is a bit on the long end for Linux though, both my desktop and netbook boot in around 10-15 seconds.
Telemetry, supposed to be only sending data that would benefit the user, by helping the developers to understand what the users really need.
Microsoft and Apple abused that term and it became just ‘data collection’. FOSS telemetry shouldn’t, and usually - hopefully - wouldn’t collect unnecessary data, to sell it back as adverts.
So if you trust <project-name>, I don’t see why not to enable it. It just helps the devs, and you too, at the end.
Unless I’m misunderstanding, that’s all related to those KDE packages. I’d say if you’re a heavy user of Plasma or apps relying on those KDE packages you might as well enable it.
GIMP has its share of issues, just like any other software. but it’s biggest issue is that somewhere down the line general users got this idea in their head that it was supposed to be a Photoshop clone.
So they go into it with certain expectations and then get frustrated when it doesn’t work that way. People like me, who actually learned GIMP before PS, obviously didn’t go in with the same bias and therefore have a much better grasp on it.
Gimp is not a Photoshop clone. it’s its own piece of kit with it’s own design and feature decisions that some may like and others may not. That’s life. The developers have no obligation to follow any other software design scheme any more than Sony is obligated to follow LGs TV UI. They’re not clones, they’re alternatives.
if you think Gimps only function is to copy Photoshop, you’re in for a bad time. If you want to use gimp as an ALTERNATIVE and go in without the bias, you’ll likely learn your way around a LOT faster.
I’m not excusing Gimps failings. far from it. but I AM saying that half the issue is the Photoshop users thinking that gimp only exists to copy everything from their precious Adobe daddy. And that’s simply not true.
Honestly I feel like this attitude is the reason GIMP’s UX suffers. They’re so determined to be “not like photoshop” that they’re unwilling to fix some of their more boneheaded UI decisions out of fear that they’d be seen as copying photoshop.
That's not exactly my impression from following the design conversations through the years. They're more approaching decisions from the angle of what they think is best, their philosophy is to plainly ignore what others do and follow their own direction. Of course taking inspiration from Photoshop might sometimes be a good thing, if it doesn't conflict with the GIMP way of doing things.
I've noticed in recent years some newcomer devs have had discussions on how to design their contributions, mentioning Photoshop and other alternative ways and there were just conversations about the merits of the different approaches that could be taken and what would fit the GIMP best, without bias.
Anyway, I wasn't aware that GIMP UX suffers, I've never used anything else and am happy with it. It seem logical to me, obviously with fewer features than Photoshop but how much can a couple of guys do and they've had to refactor most of the GIMP for 3.0, but that'll open up for a lot of functionality being added moving forward..
Anyway, I wasn’t aware that GIMP UX suffers, I’ve never used anything else and am happy with it.
My argument here is that by never having used anything else, you wouldn’t necessarily realize how much better other UX choices could have been.
That said, I do have to give the devs some credit, as they have fixed two major issues, by adding single-window-mode and unifying the transform tools. Having each transform be its own separate tool was just awful UX IMO.
The biggest remaining UX problem, in my opinion, is the way GIMP forces layers to have fixed boundaries. Literally no other layer-based image editor has fixed layer boundaries, because it makes very little sense as a concept. Layers should solely be defined by their content, not by arbitrary layer properties set in a dialog box.
In terms of UI sometimes you think something is better merely because you learnt this way. The best example would be windows style desktop versus macos style desktop. I can’t use another desktop than a windows style one, which is why I always used kde and I always hated gnome.
Now I don’t know whether gimp is good enough or not, but it must be said IMO.
If you want to use gimp as an ALTERNATIVE and go in without the bias, you’ll likely learn your way around a LOT faster.
I think this is the key phrase – do you want an alternative (where you might have to learn new ways of doing things), or do you want a clone? GIMP is not a clone, but an alternative.
I also think this gets to something I was told loooooooooong ago, when I was a young lad asking what was the best computer to buy. Someone told me, “Find all the software you want/need to run, and get the computer that will run it all.”
In other words, if you need to use Photoshop, then maybe you don’t use Linux – maybe stick with Mac or (shudder) Windows.
I always love it when Linux users recommend going back to Windows as a option. It takes real maturity to admit that everything is a viable option, and sometimes especially in a professional workplace that Windows and MacOS should both be considered if Linux is limiting your workflow.
@displaced_city_mouse@Adderbox76 yeah I'm fairly OS agnostic, I hate them all...just hate Windows more which I think you might agree with considering the shuddering induced by mentioning Windows 😏 I use ChromeOS, Mac, & iOS daily bc for my uses they are least problematic. Use Win 10 for gaming but looking to switch to Linux not W11 for that and have been dabbling/learning Android & Linux. Honestly it's a good time to be a nerd IMHO.
I’ve migrated to a lot of different programs since switching to Linux: Premiere to Resolve, 3DS Max to Blender, to name a few. And I never expected the switch from Photoshop, which I so dearly love, to whatever good alternative that exists - to be easy. I’m willing to put in the time to learn GIMP, if only it hadn’t such glaring and prominent issues that make it really difficult to use.
I’m not expecting a clone. I’m not expecting the UI to be the same. And, I’m willing to learn this program from the ground up. But I want a consistent experience - an app that works. For me, GIMP gets in the way a lot; making things unnecessarily difficult just for the sake of being “different”.
I don’t mean to hate on GIMP. It works very well for people who like it. But we all have different preferences when it comes to software, and in the end - It’s just, not a good alternative for what I prefer. I’m willing to learn something new, but from my experience, GIMP will have (and has) a lot of icks that I just need to “put up with” to be usable. Especially efficiency. GIMP does not feel efficient, like at all. Might be because I haven’t learned it, but even Resolve felt efficient the first time I used it.
I don’t have the same experience with Krita whatsoever. And sure, maybe Krita is a little closer to Photoshop than GIMP is, but I much prefer Krita’s overall experience much more than GIMP - even if it’s missing some more advanced features.
I will stick to Krita, most likely, as that’s what I find myself most comfortable with. But it’s been interesting to hear what everyone else’s experiences are.
I use krita plus darktable. Together they give me everything I need.
You are correct that Krita is not a photo editor on its own. But it is also not designed to be. Linux developers have less of a one tool for every job ideal. Due to not needing to compete the same way commercial developers do.
linux
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.