Gimp Vs Adobe

copz

In Comparison which is better the Gimp or Adobe. Are the features exactly the same, or is the Gimp a little be-hide in features.

Kintarō Hattori

There is no comparison, Photoshop is by far and away the better piece of software. While Gimp is very good it's not quite in the same league.

However the issue at hand is affordability. Photoshops costs hundreds of euro as opposed to Gimp which is eh...... free.

5uspect

I would put the GIMP at a level equal to Photoshop 7.
With a lot of the addons available for it this improves.

It's an awfully clunky slow PoS tho.

stcstc

there are some fundemental things missing from gimp

for me one of the main ones is that its only 8bit. this is a major issue for anything of a high level B&W for exmple

DaireQuinlan

stcstc wrote: »

for me one of the main ones is that its only 8bit. this is a major issue for anything of a high level B&W for exmple

Bhalash / fenster mentioned something about there being 16 bit support in some recent build, that new graphics engine they've been integrating for seemingly the last 4 years is finally available if you cinfigure it. Dunno if it was an actual release or whether he built it from the trunk though.

stcstc

ah ok

i dont follow it that closely, but last time i looked it didnt have 16 bit support

DaireQuinlan

stcstc wrote: »

i dont follow it that closely, but last time i looked it didnt have 16 bit support

I check in every few years to see if they've added proper colour profile management and 16 bit, the two most requested items on their feature list. In the latest release they've even fixed up the GUI apparently so it's not as godawful unusable as it was up until now :-)

AnCatDubh

copz wrote: »

In Comparison which is better the Gimp or Adobe. Are the features exactly the same, or is the Gimp a little be-hide in features.

What might you be intending on doing with your processing? What features would you like?

If you want to do Crops, Contrasts, Levels, Curves, Satursations, Clone, Scale, Heal, Dodge/Burn, Rotate, layers, black and white conversions, presets (known as script-fu's), filters, masks, and 101 other features, then the gimp will be just fine for you.

If you want to do content aware fill, then photoshop it is

Ok, so there are usability and learning differences where photoshop is way more supported.

Photoshop is more popular = Better support and you feel you are in the club.

Photoshop is more expensive - 550 yoyo's or there abouts to buy from scratch.

The Gimp is free.

Photoshop has native raw support.

With the gimp, you'll use UFRaw for Raw processing (free again and integrates ).

Personally, I find the gimp does everything that I need at the moment. Occasionally the 8 bit thing raises my eyebrows a little but only occasionally.

Some of the online editors such as Thumba and Pixelr are nifty too (jpg only) and they're also free. Thumba even allows a local install of it.

Oh yeah, if you'd like to run the free gimp but have it look like the 550 yoyo's photoshop, then you can run gimpshop which essentially makes your gimp installation look a bit like photoshop. I've never used it as I don't know what photoshop looks like eitherways but I believe it is quite popular.

Heebie

Proper color profile management isn't useful if you don't have proper color control in the user-interface it's running in..and since GIMP is developed primarily on Linux, and X doesn't have color management built-in.. any color management is going to be cobbed into Windows or MacOS versions (if they are version specific.)

I do sometimes use GIMP for things that I don't care about the color too much on.. because my main desktop computer runs Linux.

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I check in every few years to see if they've added proper colour profile management and 16 bit, the two most requested items on their feature list. In the latest release they've even fixed up the GUI apparently so it's not as godawful unusable as it was up until now :-)

Heebie

The tools that I find lacking in GIMP that really make me sore are adjustment layers & easy editing of layer masking/transparency, and comprehensive color management (including within the GUI.), and support for bit-depths deeper than 8-bits per color (24-bit) I like to have as much color information as possible.. it makes for being able to make much finer adjustments.

If it had those.. and I didn't already have legitimate license to use Photoshop, I'd probably just use GIMP.