Anyone use GIMP?

[Ysarex]

I don't know why people keep saying Gimp is difficult to use. It is every bit as easy to use as Photoshop (I have both), even if different.

Same here. Only that I don't have PS anymore on my computer.

The learning curve actually isn't more difficult in GIMP, it's just that Gimp looks a little different.
There's a larger margin between the icons. Slightly different menus with more options.
But it actually does 100% the same.
You can even make macros and program them with scheme or other languages.

100% is a little optimistic there. Gimp has a place and the price is certainly right, but there are differences of consequence between GIMP's abilities and Photoshop. It's also true that GIMP can do things Photoshop can't, but here's the thing: there's nothing unique to GIMP that I miss while using Photoshop, but the inverse is not true. GIMP lacks critical features that I use regularly in Photoshop.

Joe

 

[480sparky]

..........but the inverse is not true. GIMP lacks critical features that I use regularly in Photoshop.

Joe

The inverse can be true. I have yet to use GIMP and think, "Gee, I wish I had PS so I could ......". In other words, PS won't do anything for me that GIMP can't.

 

[Ysarex]

..........but the inverse is not true. GIMP lacks critical features that I use regularly in Photoshop.

Joe

The inverse can be true. I have yet to use GIMP and think, "Gee, I wish I had PS so I could ......". In other words, PS won't do anything for me that GIMP can't.

The industry standard for professional editing of RGB photos is to work with 16 bit files. The GIMP team knows that which is why they've been working and trying and telling us repeatedly that finally it really will happen and GIMP will be able to edit 16 bit files. They wouldn't have kept telling us for the last 5+ years that it was coming if it didn't matter. A recent news release: "We are excited to announce the first development release of GIMP in the 2.9.x series. It is another major milestone towards making GIMP a state-of-the art image editing application for graphic designers, photographers, illustrators, and scientists." That was November 2015, more than a year ago. You can get 2.9 but it's still a beta and unstable. The stable release remains 2.8 and it can not open and edit a 16 bit photograph.

Every RGB photo generated by my raw converters is 16 bit (Must be a reason why all raw converters will output 16 bit RGB photos) and GIMP can't open one of them without forcing it to 8 bit.

Joe

 

[480sparky]

..........but the inverse is not true. GIMP lacks critical features that I use regularly in Photoshop.

Joe

The inverse can be true. I have yet to use GIMP and think, "Gee, I wish I had PS so I could ......". In other words, PS won't do anything for me that GIMP can't.

The industry standard for professional editing of RGB photos is to work with 16 bit files. The GIMP team knows that which is why they've been working and trying and telling us repeatedly that finally it really will happen and GIMP will be able to edit 16 bit files. They wouldn't have kept telling us for the last 5+ years that it was coming if it didn't matter. A recent news release: "We are excited to announce the first development release of GIMP in the 2.9.x series. It is another major milestone towards making GIMP a state-of-the art image editing application for graphic designers, photographers, illustrators, and scientists." That was November 2015, more than a year ago. You can get 2.9 but it's still a beta and unstable. The stable release remains 2.8 and it can not open and edit a 16 bit photograph.

Every RGB photo generated by my raw converters is 16 bit (Must be a reason why all raw converters will output 16 bit RGB photos) and GIMP can't open one of them without forcing it to 8 bit.

Joe

I do edit in 16 bit. I use GIMP to polish the final images off, or do editing that cannot be done with the 16-bit editors I use.

 

[jcdeboever]

I don't know why people keep saying Gimp is difficult to use. It is every bit as easy to use as Photoshop (I have both), even if different.

Same here. Only that I don't have PS anymore on my computer.

The learning curve actually isn't more difficult in GIMP, it's just that Gimp looks a little different.
There's a larger margin between the icons. Slightly different menus with more options.
But it actually does 100% the same.
You can even make macros and program them with scheme or other languages.

100% is a little optimistic there. Gimp has a place and the price is certainly right, but there are differences of consequence between GIMP's abilities and Photoshop. It's also true that GIMP can do things Photoshop can't, but here's the thing: there's nothing unique to GIMP that I miss while using Photoshop, but the inverse is not true. GIMP lacks critical features that I use regularly in Photoshop.

Joe

Maybe but sometimes the operations are called something different. When someone tells me to do something in in PS or LR, I Google it and usually find the answer.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[ratssass]

I don't know why people keep saying Gimp is difficult to use. It is every bit as easy to use as Photoshop (I have both), even if different.

www.johns-old-cameras.blogspot.co.uk

Because they're PS snobs. They look down their noses at GIMP users because they spent a lot of money on PS.

Just like there's gear snobs that will snub a K1000 shooter because it's not a Leica. Or a Mamiya shooter because it's not a Hasselblad.

....thats a very broad brush,you paint with.

 

[john.margetts]

The industry standard for professional editing of RGB photos is to work with 16 bit files.

Being a competent photographer who needs to print on an 8-bit printer, I am making slight adjustments to brightness, contrast, slight cloning away of annoying bits and then cropping - all done excellently by Gimp. If I ever forget how to use my camera and need to make drastic changes, I would use Photoshop.


www.johns-old-cameras.blogspot.co.uk

 

[davholla]

Gimp is a bit difficult to get to know, but with all the tutorials and plugins available, it usually gets the job done.
I process raw files with darktable and use GIMP for touch-ups/fixes.

That is what I do as well, however saying that I am not very good with either and so can't judge. I should probably try lightroom and photoshop although I spend too much money on camera stuff I can't justify spending more.

 

[terry_g]

I have been using Gimp for years. There is a plugin called UFRaw that lets Gimp
open raw files.

Terry

 

[Ysarex]

The industry standard for professional editing of RGB photos is to work with 16 bit files.

Being a competent photographer who needs to print on an 8-bit printer, I am making slight adjustments to brightness, contrast, slight cloning away of annoying bits and then cropping - all done excellently by Gimp. If I ever forget how to use my camera and need to make drastic changes, I would use Photoshop.


www.johns-old-cameras.blogspot.co.uk

The fact that you're printing 8 bit has no bearing at all on whether you edit 8 or 16 bit files.

You're saying GIMP is OK for light editing but not for heavier editing and that confirms my point that GIMP is not a 100% replacement for a 16 bit editor. I agree. Linking the need for heavier editing to whether or not you remember how to use your camera is your problem. You're trying to suggest that any need for heavier editing only occurs when you don't know how to use your camera and that's incorrect. The need for heavier editing can result from difficult lighting circumstances that can not be addressed at the time the photo is taken.

Joe

 

[Ysarex]

I have been using Gimp for years. There is a plugin called UFRaw that lets Gimp
open raw files.

Terry

GIMP can not open raw files. UFRaw can open raw files and after UFRaw has converted the raw file to an RGB photo then GIMP can edit the photo. It's just like Photoshop can not open raw files. ACR can open raw files and once the file is converted to an RGB photo then Photoshop can edit the photo.

Joe

 

[Village Idiot]

I've ready some good things about Affinty Photo. I know it's OS X only, but I think I'd still like to try it.

 

[Dikkie]

I have been using Gimp for years. There is a plugin called UFRaw that lets Gimp
open raw files.

Terry

Yeah, there are several other free open source RAW converters too, like DarkRoom, Rawtherapee,... work crossplatform, and stand alone apart from your desired photo editor Gimp.

 

[table1349]

I've ready some good things about Affinty Photo. I know it's OS X only, but I think I'd still like to try it.

Affinity Photo rocks. It is in virtually every way photoshops equal and for processing speed of large files it blows photoshop away. Don't know how they do it but the folks from Adobe ought to be paying them a visit to find out how.

 

[minicoop1985]

GIMP won't open the .MOS files from my Leaf. That being said, it's a GREAT bargain. Can't beat free, with regular updates, right?