20 Replies Latest reply on May 28, 2018 1:01 PM by nataliac52294635

    Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017

    PrimitiveOutpost Level 1

      Hi folks, I know some threads already exist for this topic but they are from years ago so i'm looking for a fresh answer. I've been using Gimp but have some acquaintances that say I should upgrade to Photoshop. My issue is they can't really tell me why its better, just that it's the standard. They both seem to offer the same functionality so, is there a brief answer as to why it's better in 2017? Perhaps there are some people that switched from Gimp to Photoshop that can weight in.

       

      Thanks

        • 1. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
          c.pfaffenbichler Level 9

          Does Gimp support Smart Objects?

          If not then that alone should (edit: in my opinion) provide a reason to switch, but in any case first avail yourself of the free Photoshop trial to check if it works with your set-up and if you feel like you can get used to the interface.

          • 2. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
            Nexahs1138 Level 3

            Simple answer, are you trying to get a professional job?

             

            If yes - get Photoshop as you won't be hired with GIMP.

            If no - stick to whatever you want.

            1 person found this helpful
            • 3. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
              PrimitiveOutpost Level 1

              Thanks for the responses. I didn't notice the free trial. I'll give it a go and see what I think.

              • 4. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                martinv64372987 Level 1

                Never had a customer asking:  "do you use Gimp or PS?"

                • 5. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                  Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                  It thinking that no one here is going to know much about the Gimp, because this after all, a Photoshop forum.  However a quick Google tells me that the Gimp lacks CMYK, but it was not easy finding out that tiny weakness because if you Google Photoshop vs Gimp you seem to get lots of links to geeky Linux users saying that Photoshop sucks, and real men use the Gimp.

                   

                  On the other hand, I suspect that Photoshop users have nothing to prove, so neven even think about the Gimp, and certaily don't feel the need to justify their use of Photoshop. Take this wee table

                  Photoshop is extremley powerful. The Gimp is easy to learn as there is bugger all to it.

                  Photoshop is extremley powerful.  The Gimp would fit on a ZX Spectrum, from a few floppy disks.

                  Photoshop is extremley powerful.  The Gimp is too simple to need any resources.

                  Photoshop users are prepared to pay for a quality product.  Gimp users are tight wads

                  Photoshop is used by professionals and serious hobiests.  Gimp is best for people who don't need a quality product.

                  Like who is going to pay real money to watch a Gimp Tutorial?

                   

                   

                  1 person found this helpful
                  • 7. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                    Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                      Dag, I think you have beaten me in the derogatory Gimp comments stakes.

                    • 8. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                      gener7 Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                      "One of these things is not like the other" (Children's TV Show jingle).

                      • 9. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                        stefanw21315169 Level 1

                        GIMP does support CMYK and 16bit colors since GIMP 2.9 (August 2017). It had CMYK support via plugins in older versions.

                        • 10. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                          polygrinder Level 1

                          @martinv64372987

                          "Never had a customer asking:  "do you use Gimp or PS?"

                           

                          Fair enough. Clients don't care. Employers do.

                          Take Photoshop off of your resume and add in Gimp. See if you get the job.

                          I can see it now, I am going for a job interview at say Epic or ID and in the interview they ask me " So, what software do you use? Photoshop and 3ds Max?" Your reply, no I use Gimp and Blender". Interview over.

                          • 11. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                            rayek.elfin Level 4

                            polygrinder  wrote

                             

                            @martinv64372987

                            "Never had a customer asking:  "do you use Gimp or PS?"

                             

                            Fair enough. Clients don't care. Employers do.

                            Take Photoshop off of your resume and add in Gimp. See if you get the job.

                            I can see it now, I am going for a job interview at say Epic or ID and in the interview they ask me " So, what software do you use? Photoshop and 3ds Max?" Your reply, no I use Gimp and Blender". Interview over.

                            Hmmm... If a texture artist would mention (s)he uses Photoshop only they'd get booted out. Substance products are preferred nowadays, and Photoshop is merely an assisting tool in the texturing pipeline. And in that role any image editor can be used.

                             

                            The applicant with Substance Designer and Painter on their resume gets the job. Not the one with Photoshop.

                            • 12. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                              gener7 Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                              Here's a reply in Quora that should help point out the differences:

                               

                              Is Gimp capable of doing what Photoshop does? If not, why?

                              • 13. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                D Fosse Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                rayek.elfin  wrote

                                 

                                The applicant with Substance Designer and Painter on their resume gets the job. Not the one with Photoshop.

                                This is about Photoshop vs. Gimp. Not Photoshop vs. everything else. Nobody ever said Photoshop does everything.

                                • 14. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                  Trevor.Dennis Adobe Community Professional (Moderator)

                                  https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse  wrote

                                   

                                  rayek.elfin   wrote

                                   

                                  The applicant with Substance Designer and Painter on their resume gets the job. Not the one with Photoshop.

                                  This is about Photoshop vs. Gimp. Not Photoshop vs. everything else. Nobody ever said Photoshop does everything.

                                  I'm trying to think of another image editor that does as much though.   As for who gets the job, then wouldn't your portfolio matter more than the tools it was created with?

                                  • 15. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                    D Fosse Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                    Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                                     

                                    As for who gets the job, then wouldn't your portfolio matter more than the tools it was created with?

                                    I should think so, yes. In my case it's pretty obvious what I need, but I simply couldn't imagine my employer telling me to use this or that software - especially since they have no idea how I do what I do. Nor do they care. They just want the finished results. What they say is, "This is our budget. What do you need?"

                                    • 16. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                      Nexahs1138 Level 3

                                      Are you being employed by some randomer or an actual company though?

                                       

                                      No company will hire someone who's key skills are GIMP and Blender, they aren't professional/industry standards. Companies build pipelines around certain products, and Photoshop is always involved.

                                      • 17. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                        rayek.elfin Level 4

                                        Nexahs1138  wrote

                                         

                                        Are you being employed by some randomer or an actual company though?

                                         

                                        No company will hire someone who's key skills are GIMP and Blender, they aren't professional/industry standards. Companies build pipelines around certain products, and Photoshop is always involved.

                                        That is no longer quite the case (at least, not as much as a few years ago) with Blender. For example, BarnstormVFX is a Blender and Nuke only studio since two years. Their credits include well-known productions such as The Good Wife, Man in the High Castle, and so on. They were/are looking for Blender experts.

                                         

                                        Barnstorm VFX

                                         

                                        Blender is steadily making progress in VFX studios' pipelines here and there.

                                         

                                        But yes, Photoshop is almost always part of a studio's pipeline somewhere, if only for quick image edits. For actual compositing mostly node-based software solutions are used, of course. Depends on the type of industry as well.

                                        And Blender isn't an industry standard yet. It may change in the upcoming five years, though. Things are always in flux.

                                        • 18. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                          rayek.elfin Level 4

                                          Trevor.Dennis  wrote

                                           

                                          https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse   wrote

                                           

                                          rayek.elfin    wrote

                                           

                                          The applicant with Substance Designer and Painter on their resume gets the job. Not the one with Photoshop.

                                          This is about Photoshop vs. Gimp. Not Photoshop vs. everything else. Nobody ever said Photoshop does everything.

                                          I'm trying to think of another image editor that does as much though.  

                                          It depends on how you define the term "image editor" and what it is used for and the type of work. As a layer stack based image editor there isn't really anything else on the market with the same amount of features: video editing, 3d rendering and painting, compositing, masking, general photo editing, animation,...

                                           

                                          Digging a little bit deeper, however, I feel the more important question to ask is "how well does cope with each task". As an example, the other day a question was asked on this forum about rendering a 3d balloon-type text, and the finished render looks terribly sub-par. The rendering is very slow as well. But that is the extent of what Photoshop's 3d rendering is able to provide the user with. And most Photoshop users have no idea whatsoever what can be accomplished in a 3d application, nor how PS stacks up in this regard.

                                           

                                          So is it fair to compare dedicated 3d applications with Photoshop's 3d rendering? I think it is. In the end it's the result that counts - and the Photoshop devs haven't updated that part of the applications for a long time. Instead, Adobe launches (yet another) 3d tool, and Photoshop is left with an antiquated 3d renderer that really can't be taken seriously anymore. Instead they could integrate AMD's ProRender, and boost Photoshop's 3d rendering into the current century, rather than letting it rot in the previous one.

                                           

                                          Having said this, I'd rather have the team update the core usability and image editing functions, though (see below).

                                           

                                          Anyway, back to Photoshop versus Gimp :-)

                                           

                                          Obviously Photoshop still leaves Gimp in the dust. At least for now: Gimp did close the distance somewhat since the introduction of proper 16bpc and 32bpc support was implemented.

                                           

                                          While it really can't compare in sheer power, Photoshop would surely benefit from taking its cue from Gimp in certain areas. I am listing those here.

                                          • Gimp provides a proper 16 bit per channel mode, with the choice for either integer or floating point. Photoshop's 16bpc mode is a 15bit one, and clips full range 16bpc images without warning. That is inexcusable in today's HDR pipelines, and is the result of legacy code decisions to improve Photoshop's performance on hardware available at the time when 16bpc support was first introduced.
                                            Also, the image pyramid in 16bpc mode is converted to an 8bit one for the screen when zoomed out beyond ~66%. Bad.
                                            All16bpc capable image editor on the market (free or commercial) offer true 16bpc - Photoshop standing alone embarrassingly enough. And the result is confusion on the part of users, and ill-given advice by well-meaning Photoshop experts who have no clue what is really  happening behind the screens.
                                            This should have been fixed by now, but still is not. I suspect that Photoshop's 16bpc code will have to be rewritten from scratch, and that might be a monumental task all by itself.
                                          • Gimp has real coloured brushes. Pick up a part of the screen as a brush, and the colour information is optionally maintained. The user may draw with these. Photoshop still can't do this, and only 8bpc brushes are supported.
                                            I missed this feature since Amiga times and Deluxe Paint :-)
                                          • Middle mouse button panning. So simple, yet so efficient to have in a design application. Pan and zoom the view with one middle mouse scrollwheel button. Bliss. Photoshop users are forced to hold down a modifier key. Slower, less efficient, and may be an accessibility problem for people with certain physical impairments (I know this from experience: I taught Adobe products to a physically impaired person who is only able to move her right arm).
                                            At least provide a simple preference options. This could be implemented in an hour by the Photoshop team.
                                          • Gimp's Curves, Levels, and other adjustment dialogs are scale-able to any size the user wants. Want it full-screen? No problem. In stark contrast Photoshop's adjustment dialogs are tiny up to small size.
                                            I expect that I won't have to explain why a scale-able curves dialog would be extremely useful.
                                          • G'mic is supported in Gimp. That would be great to have in Photoshop.
                                          • Gimp's gradients (while a pig to use!) support additional blending algorithms, resulting in nicer looking blends.
                                          • Gimp features a simple Color to Alpha function that is missing in Photoshop. While it could be argued (as it has been in the past) that the experienced Photoshop user solves this by messing around a lot with channels and such, this simple option in Gimp is an efficient and simple workflow enhancement.
                                          • Gimp provides the user with a number of nice controllable noise/pattern generators. Photoshop's "Clouds" filter is rather limited in comparison.

                                           

                                          There are many other areas where Photoshop could be improved when compared to a couple of commercial competitors, but this is about comparing Gimp and Photoshop.

                                          • 19. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                            mario92 Level 1

                                            Hi i want to know if GIMP can be considered a copy of certain Photoshop applications and if it could be considered legal?  thank you

                                            • 20. Re: Photoshop vs Gimp in 2017
                                              nataliac52294635 Level 1

                                              I had many customers, doing this question.