Handy Tweaks To Make GIMP Replace Photoshop

Advertisement

GIMP is the favorite graphics editing program of many designers and graphic artists. It is free and compatible with Windows, Mac and Linux (the two big reasons for its popularity). It has a wide array of features, as well as plug-ins, filters and brushes. Documentation is primarily available in online communities, as well as through extensive add-ons.

GIMP screenshot

GIMP was never designed to replace Photoshop, yet with every release, it comes a little closer to being able to do so. It can be used to author graphics, create logos and edit photos, as well as make short animations (using GAP). Despite these features, the open-source app is a foreign world for many users switching from Photoshop. Familiar tools are missing, menus are laid out differently and tasks must be accomplished in unknown ways.

In this article, we list eight tweaks to make GIMP a more serious Photoshop replacement option. Version 2.6 was used to test the following tweaks, but past versions of the app should work as well.

Installing Plug-Ins, Brushes and Filters

Before continuing, you need to know how to install add-ons. It’s very simple to do, and takes little time. You’ll find three different folders in the application’s program folder. The location of the application folder depends on the operating system you use:

  • Windows: the folder is located in C:/Programs/GIMP.
  • Mac: right-click and choose the application folder.
  • Linux: press Ctrl+H in the Home folder to reveal the hidden .gimp folder.

GIMP screenshot

To install a brush or plug-in, copy and paste it into the appropriate folder and restart GIMP.

1. Add the PSPI Plug-In

The PSPI plug-in allows GIMP to use Photoshop plug-ins. This increases the number of filters available to GIMP and allows Photoshop users to not have to sacrifice their library. If an equivalent GIMP plug-in can’t be found, assembling a kit of Photoshop filters is an potential option.

GIMP screenshot

To start, download the PSPI plug-in from Gimp.org

In the program folder, copy and paste the entire contents of the PSPI plug-in download into the Plug-ins folder. If you’re running Linux, make sure you copy both the PSPI plug-in and the PSPI.exe, or it will not work.

Restart GIMP and open the Filters menu. At the bottom, you will see a new entry: “Photopshop Filters Plug-In Settings.” Select that to open the Photoshop dialog box, and point it to the folder where your Photoshop plug-ins are located. Add all future Photoshop plug-ins to that folder.

2. Install Layer Styles

Layer Styles are a beloved feature of many Photoshop users, and living without them can be a difficult adjustment. Layer Styles are called Layer Effects in GIMP and include: Drop Shadow, Inner Glow, Outer Glow, Gradient Overlay, Stroke, Bevel and Emboss, etc. These can be used to quickly apply effects to your layer(s) without having to jump through hoops.

GIMP screenshot

Download the Layer Effects GIMP plug-in from Gimp.org. There are two versions: Script-Fu and Python. The Python version allows for live previews of the effects; the Script-Fu version does not. No matter which version you choose, save the plug-in in GIMP’s Plug-in folder and restart the program.

If you download the Python version, Layer Effects will be added under Image > Layer > Layer Effects. The Script-Fu version will be listed under Script-Fu > Layer Effects.

3. Add CMYK Color Separation

CMYK stands for cyan, magenta, yellow, key (black). In the context of photo editors and graphics programs, it is a subtractive color model that is different from the commonly used, additive RGB color model. In simplified terms, RGB colors work by becoming lighter with the addition of white, while CMYK colors subtract the white by overlaying colors, eventually resulting in black; that black isn’t as deep as it should be for printing, so black is added to the CMYK mix.

Many users complain about GIMP’s lack of CMYK support. For many designers and photographers, images have to be converted to CMYK colors for high-quality prints. If you require CMYK separation, download the plug-in Separate+ from Yellowmagic. Save the ZIP file, extract the plug-in to the GIMP plug-in folder, then restart the program.

GIMP screenshot

The new feature will be located in the Image menu.

4. Install Liquid Rescale

Liquid Rescale is a favorite of many users and created quite a buzz when first introduced into Photoshop. Liquid Rescale makes it possible to alter an image’s dimensions from, for example, 16:9 to 4:3 without distortion by eliminating unnecessary pixels in certain areas. This process, known most commonly as seam carving, allows you to resize a narrow photo to widescreen format without stretching the content into a morphed, twisted mess.

To add the Liquid Rescale feature to GIMP, download the plug-in from Wikidot and copy it into the GIMP Plug-In folder. Restart the program.

GIMP screenshot

5. Add Essential Brushes

GIMP comes with far too few brushes; and the ones that are there are small, basic and not all useful. If you’re planning to author graphics, you’ll need a new library of brushes to accomplish anything. Installing brushes in GIMP is as simple as copying the brush file into the Brush folder and restarting GIMP.

Brushes can be downloaded from numerous locations, depending on what you’re looking for. That said, an excellent repository of free brushes of all types — including grunge, fire, splatter, stone and more — is at Blendfu.

GIMP screenshot

If you add the largest brushes available, you can scale the features in GIMP to reduce their size, allowing for high-resolution graphics.

6. Anchor Windows

If you were to ask Photoshop users their biggest dislike about GIMP, they would almost unanimously express a disdain for the loose docks and toolbars. The canvas, toolbar and layers, paths and brushes dock are all free-floating and scattered about the desktop. If you have a decent window manager, this is a benefit; for most users, it’s a hindrance.

If the loose docks in GIMP bother you, affix them to the main window by right-clicking on the dock or toolbar and selecting Always on Top. The toolbars will now stay above the main menu, and the application will work as if the docks were locked within the main window.

GIMP screenshot

If you still aren’t satisfied with the window system, two different versions of GIMP are available that have interfaces similar to Photoshop’s: GIMPshop and GimPhoto. GimPhoto has a slightly more appealing interface, but GIMPshop is based on a newer version of GIMP.

7. Install Animation Package

The GIMP Animation Package, known as GAP, allows users to create animations. The most common use of GAP is for animated GIFs and avatars; but it is sophisticated enough to make full-episode animations, surrealistic landscapes and realistic water motion.

GAP is not automatically included in GIMP. It can be downloaded from an ever-changing number of locations. Mac users can find a download and instructions at GAP-Systems. Windows users have dozens of mirrors to choose from, and a fresh Internet search will yield the best results. Finally, Linux users can download GAP by running a gimp-gap install in the terminal or, if you’re on Ubuntu, searching gimp-gap in the Synaptic packages.

GIMP screenshot

8. Enable GEGL

GEGL is a new feature found only in GIMP 2.6+. According to Gimp.org:

“Many highly requested features of the GIMP will be easier to do using GEGL. Layer effects, layer groups, and adjustment layers are quite easily represented (and efficiently calculated) using the DAG organization of GEGL. CMYK and high bit depth support will be easier because GEGL does not make the same assumptions about color spaces and data types that the GIMP does.”

It is not enabled by default. To activate the feature, simply navigate to Colors > Use GEGL and check the box next to it. Once it is activated, you can use the presets available at Tools > GEGL Operations. Approximately a dozen different presets can be applied to layers and images.

GIMP screenshot

Conclusion

These tweaks, plug-ins and add-ons push GIMP closer to its full potential. While it still wouldn’t replace Photoshop as the top graphics program, it will stand a step higher and provide features that would otherwise be missing.

In addition to the add-ons above, a great deal more can be added to customize GIMP to your own personal needs, including HDR plug-ins, photo cleaners, scrapbook borders and animation effects for GAP. New features are added to the GIMP registry everyday. In addition, if you can’t find a plug-in to meet your needs, you can write your own plug-in script.

For further resources, check out these links:

(al)

Blair Mathis is part of the editor team at Laptop Logic, where she primarily writes Linux-related articles, tips and how-to's. She has however also worked extensively with mobile tech news and laptop computer reviews.

  1. 1

    Julian Exner(jex)

    April 3rd, 2009 1:50 am

    Gimp rocks!
    Photoshop is unreasonable expensive, i mean over 1000€ for software….?!

    -1
    • 2

      Uh, no it’s not. That’s not all that much when you’re talking about professional software; it lasts forever.

      I don’t use photoshop, I use GIMP, as it isn’t worth the money to me, however, if I had the money to spare I would definitely buy photoshop. The layer effects plugin here for example is not the same thing in photoshop. In photoshop you can automatically add drop shadow or such, here you’d have to go make a new one each time you change the layer.

      +3
      • 3

        It’s not too bad if you’re a student. I’m going to get it soon, while I can still qualify as a student. CS5 Web Design Premium Student and Teacher is just under AU$400. Just have to wait till my birthday.

        I just wish I’d found this post earlier. I’ve been toiling away, trying to find workarounds for all the PS tutorials I’ve been following. Thanks a bunch.

        0
      • 4

        Lasts forever? No software really lasts forever unless you get free upgrades forever.

        +3
    • 5

      Photoshop is expensive. Period. It’s bloated, too.

      But the The Gimp is just .. well, gimpy.

      •No Adjustment Layers
      This is huge. In order to get the same functionality you must DUPLICATE the base layer, apply the filter or adjustment, and repeat until your comp is done, otherwise there is no going back. This is a big memory waster that is easy to make an irreparable mistake with.

      •No 16-bit support
      I suppose the lack of adjustment layers isn’t that big a deal without 16- and 32-bit support, at least it’s not going to be as inefficient. So I guess utilizing 1/256 the data is worth it? Oh well. Shadow and Hilight detail isn’t THAT important, right?

      •No CMY*K
      Separations? Really? Your prepress guy is going to LOVE that. No way to trap. No way to isolate K. No way to control black generation. No way to do much of anything of value until you load it back into Photoshop!

      I can 100% guarantee you, that if you fancy yourself a graphic artist and you deliver a .zip containing four greyscale images of a logo without trap or isolation you’ll do nothing but provide lots of laughs from the printer. In fact, submitting such a file is no better than an RGB. At least an RGB won’t need to be recomposed.

      So sure, I guess the GIMP is good for lightening the mood for your over stressed prepress department, I can hear the banter now, but you’re going to look very unprofessional. It will cost you more. And when they are asked who they would recommend for a graphic artist, it will not be you.

      •Awkward color management
      Color management is there… kind of.

      •Limited Hue/Sat adjustment
      This is the tool I use the most for making the hardest corrections happen. Noise reduction, chromatic aberration, selective color adjustment, vibrancy… but with gimp I’m stuck with only 6 colors to choose from with no feather, just a gimpy “overlap”. This makes hue/sat pretty useless. Sure, you could build a mask, duplicate the layer, apply the hue/sat adjustment, but I’d like to see Photoshop’s Hue/Sat tool improved! Using The Gimp’s hue/sat is just far too limiting.

      Why is the gimp so terrible, yet other (unrelated) GPL software so great? It might be in The GIMP users themselves. GIMP is hailed as such a perfect platform, there seems to be little room for improvement. However, the above features are not minor ones, and are used by photographers and/or graphic artists on a daily basis. GIMP users are so busy pointing out how great the GIMP is, that it can do so much that Photoshop can, that there is very little talk about the significant features that it’s lacking.

      You don’t see the Blender community saying that Blender can do everything XSI or Maya can do. Because it can’t, and they are not so delusional to think it can. Instead they focus on improving the package so that it can perform rather than inflating on what Blender is already good at.

      People who advocate the GIMP clearly are either in denial, or don’t understand the value of things like Adjustment Layers and 16- and 32-bit imaging or native CMYK and LAB.

      There certainly are many, many bells and whistles that are compared to Photoshop, and compared to Photoshop LOUDLY. But, it’s not the bloat that I’m interested in, it’s the functionality.

      +3
      • 6

        RTFA. All that stuff that you complain about not existing is the point of this article. It’s easily implemented by plugins, which is a brilliant design decision. You find a feature that is lacking? Get a plugin.

        +1
        • 7

          Have you ever used photoshop for a day in your life? There is *no* way to implement adjustment layers in gimp. I shoot 22MP pictures in fashion. I need to do 30+ adjustments for every finished pictured. I’ve been told time and time again to just “create new layers” whenever I need a tweak. What sort of computer would I need for that? 64 gigs for 10 pictures open at a time? 128 gigs for 20? An average shoot has 100+ all in raw.

          On top of that every step is irreversible. There is no way to put into words just how broken this makes gimp.

          I’m writing an cython based program that can do the things photographers need because no one in gimp seems remotely interested in making it useful for anything but a fancy icon maker.

          Until then paying for photoshop every two years is *cheaper* than paying for the sort of machine that could let gimp do a bad job of what I need it to do. Think about that before saying gimp is *free* (as in beer).

          P.S. It’s been 4 years since I heard people on the gimp team say that adjustment layers were planned for a future resale. I’m not holding my breath.

          0
  2. 8

    this article is great. I would like to try it.

    0
  3. 9

    I shuddered when I read the title. Literally shuddered. Gimp’s back-end is amazing. Gimp’s front-end makes that fact entirely irrelevant, as it’s just so bad, IMHO. I’ll of course be trying all these tips, but I fear you’ve picked an impossible task in trying to make Gimp anything less than torture…

    -1
    • 10

      That’s dumb. It’s just not what you are used to. I can do anything you can do in Photoshop.

      +1
      • 11

        Okay, not 16-bit color, but, honestly, you can’t see that many colors. And if you wind up with posterization, you’re the one who screwed up.

        0
  4. 12

    Thanks,
    Can’t find enough things about the gimp.

    0
  5. 13

    You guys are too fast…. I just about to write a article on smiler motion… Anyway.. Nice article Blair… Nice writing.

    DKumar M.

    0
  6. 14

    Ill just stick to photoshop.

    -7
  7. 18

    Makes wanna try GIMP. I haven’t used it but I think I’m curious and encouraged to try it… after reading this post :)

    0
  8. 19

    FreelancerCrowd

    April 3rd, 2009 2:26 am

    Perhaps not the first choice for print and press, but probably the best alternative for anything else.

    +3
  9. 20

    Photoshop is indeed very expensive, but also the most powerful.
    Most of the graphic/web designers and photographers use it.

    -1
  10. 21

    More GIMP, Inkscape and Blender articles, please. Thank you.

    0
  11. 22

    WOW!
    Brave and great post!!

    0
  12. 23

    Ill just stick to photoshop.

    Same here :P

    Btw, GIMP have a huge problem: slices! You simply can’t do slices as easy you do it in PS/FW. And this is bad…

    +1
  13. 25

    I wonder whether there is any design related product / company that uses only GIMP as their tool. it will be fantastic to show up the world what GIMP can do. I’ve ever try GIMP but it is too slow for me even compared with Photoshop 7.0 in my PC. Any suggestion?

    0
    • 26

      Yeah, Hollywood :)
      Hollywood use GIMP a lot in both the production of films (with a specially modified version of GIMP called CinePaint) and also in the creation of the film posters, etc.

      +2
      • 27

        “a lot” is kind of an exaggeration. furthermore the cinepaint you and I download is likely not the same cinepaint that they customized.

        0
      • 28

        dude, Hollywood does NOT use Gimp at all! they use Cinepaint.
        I use CinePaint as well. It supports all the higher formats; 16bit, color profiles, and higher format Tiff files, that make Gimp crash if you were to try and open them. the only problem with CinePaint is that it can be buggy, and even harder to integrate/compile. – that’s why so many CinePaint developers have ended up working for Big Film studios.

        CinePaint, although initially based on Gimp (back in like 1998 or something), is a much different beast – it’s ideal only for photo-retouching and editing film – frame by frame using it’s Flipbook feature.
        Other than that, it is very lite on features.

        0
  14. 29

    Right… GIMP will never replace Photoshop… I prefer sticking to PS, thanks :)

    -3
    • 30

      you prolly also prefer to stick with windoze.
      bahh bahh little sheep.

      -21
      • 31

        you’re either 12, or the worst troll ever.

        +11
        • 32

          He’s not trolling. He’s pointing out that anyone who comes here just to say that Photoshop is the greatest is already trolling.

          And if you are going to respond to trolls, the best way is to treat them like the 12 year olds they are.

          +1
  15. 33

    Thanks for this. You have convinced me to try GIMP. While I’d love to get PS again after I lost my last disk I simply can’t afford it so this might do the trick in the meantime.

    0
  16. 34

    I’ve found GIMP to be ok, but if you’re on a mac give Pixelmator a try. It’s beautiful to look at and very intuitive to use!

    0
  17. 35

    If its free for all then you can’t say about any problems or blame it, until u contribute something in it.
    i have tried gimp for 2 months before i purchased ps. its good but not for professional purposes.
    you cant go back and forth easily. you have limits on file size, effects, vectors . layer styles are not actually layer connected .. but i think since its free for all, its worth always than having a pirated version .. for home use.. & for commercial usage . i will stick to photoshop !

    +1
  18. 36

    I love GIMP and I don’t want to spend so much money for Paintshop as I use it for personal purposes only. That simple! Thanks for the article.

    +4
  19. 37

    Marin Todorov

    April 3rd, 2009 3:22 am

    I’m an open source fan, and I used for years GIMP under Windows, Linux and Mac OSX. Unfortunately GIMP is nowhere near Photoshop’s ease of use and abilities. I’d rather use a software for 60 – 80 bucks which you can find for the mac, which at least is usable, even though still far from Photoshop’s great workflow.

    0
  20. 38

    Good Gimp

    0
  21. 39

    Ahh, there some things in this post I’ve been dying to get in GIMP.
    What a great sum of stuff!

    0
  22. 40

    Open source is good, but PS is worth the few extra $$. It also has very good integration with all other necessary Adobe products. I always recommend GIMP to my clients who want to mess around with graphics for fun, but for the professionals the Adobe suite is the way to go!

    0
  23. 41

    If someone needs help with Gimp – then visit GimpTalk (http://www.gimptalk.com/forum/). It’s a really good and friendly community. :)

    It also has very good tutorials, for example Beginning with GIMP — Starting Tutorial for new users.

    0
  24. 42

    @Kendall

    This is right and the reason why Adobe can dictate their price. There is no real competitor.

    You decide: Is this a good or a bad thing?

    +1
  25. 43

    A topic I did not dare dream of being published here! Great. many thx.

    I am thinking on starting a small webdesign businuess aside from my regular job. As Adobe (which I use dailiy on my job) is too expensive for me this article comes more than handy.

    Now I can do my graphic work on my beloved Ubuntu Linux…

    Regards,
    Phil

    0
  26. 44

    Nice tips and tricks but Gimp still can’t replace Photoshop, it’s too weak. Of course, Gimp is a wonderful tool for beginners and hobby designers but it’s not a professional tool an Gimp annoys me very often with bugs, missing features and inconsistent UI.
    Some time ago I tried out the layer effects but they’re not equal to Photoshop’s layer effects because they create lots of new layers to simulate these effects which are not assigned to the layer itself like in Photoshop and since Gimp does not support layer groups this really sucks.
    Another quite annoying issue are the bad transformation tools that are absolutely unusable. It’s horrible to ever select a new tool for each unique type of transformation which pops up an useless window exactly over the object to transform.
    Don’t misunderstand me: I wished Gimp could be an alternative to Photoshop and from time to time I also use it but there have been so many bugs and not implemented features for years and they are not fixed yet. Far too many in my humble opinion.

    +1
  27. 45

    Excellent article, thanks!!!!

    @Ionut Staic: to make slices: draw some guides and export as slices (no difficult, ah?)

    0
  28. 46

    I have been aware of GIMP for years but found it difficult to work with. I did just boot-up GIMP on my NetBook and it hasn’t changed much.

    Saying that though, my love for Linux Mint and Fedora are making me enjoy learning new and open source software. I am downloading now for Mac and will give it another try.

    I am very open to a Photoshop replacement!

    The world is evolving, the music industry was the first notable business model to fall and now the mainstream media is crumbling. I can see OpenSource gaining more and more ground in the near future.

    0
  29. 47

    Thanks! :D

    0
  30. 48

    Very interesting article. You have to try Gimp and to overcome the first impression of difficulty. I have seens demos of liquid rescale and I can’t wait to try it !

    0
  31. 49

    Damn and I just switsched to PS. Loved Gimp though.

    0
  32. 50

    Great stuff. I find that most people’s use of PS can be replaced just fine by Gimp or Picasa too.

    Here are easier links to install the 2 packages mentioned (first contains a whole bunch including liquid rescale) on Ubuntu:

    http://appnr.com/install/gimp-plugin-registry
    http://appnr.com/install/gimp-gap

    0
  33. 51

    PSCS3 is the shit for a retoucher. But hey, I’ll have a looksie. no harm in that :)
    But the Adobe suite is just sweet. theres no comparison… sadly..

    0
  34. 52

    Not even close to Photoshop. Personal opinion.

    +1
  35. 53

    As a web programmer who often needs to whip up buttons, icons, play with photos etc., Photoshop is overkill and of course far to expensive to justify the outlay (no you cant just steal it if you are working for a respectable company). I personally find Gimp to be friendly and easy to use. Sometimes I can even open a PSD in Gimp and get better results out of it than I can in Photoshop.

    The split layout makes perfect sense with a desktop manager, a tool every professional computer user should become familiar with.

    I imagine that a significant amount of the hatred against the userability is simply people not familiar with it – people will pretty much spit acid at anything if it does not match what they are used to within 5 minutes – see the bitter hate piled on Linux, Mac or PC from those in opposing camps.

    +1
  36. 54

    If you need tutorials, visit GIMPons.net (Link)
    You will find more than 600 tutorials. All tutorials are described with pictures : before and after
    GIMP’filters are also described with pictures and all the parameters.

    0
  37. 55

    I always end up using photoshop instead of gimp.
    As a free PS alternative it is very good. Newest version also supports layers – finally.

    0
  38. 56

    Thanks very much for all those useful infos.

    0
  39. 57

    Yeah, adobe should sell their software cheaper.
    They know how to make money. They bought macromedia
    and are having more and more a monopoly in graphic software.
    Everybody knows it and everybody will buy it.
    When will they buy Quark?…

    Great to have an freeware alternative becoming better and better…

    0
  40. 58

    What about the “save as for web” is there any replacement?

    0
  41. 59

    GIMP still doesn’t have the blending options does it?

    0
  42. 60

    @centribumble totally agree.

    0
  43. 61

    I’ll stick to photoshop. The OSX version looks like crap anyway.

    0
  44. 62

    I would not hire a designer if they were not proficient in CS3/4, but instead Gimp. Photoshop might be expensive, but depending how seriously one takes their career, I would say it’s worth every penny. There are ways to learn CS3/4 without buying it as well… just saying. But recreational use? Sure… if it works, it works.

    Can it save .PSD files? Most printers I work with request those. There’s something to be said for “industry standard”. I’m not being a PS snob (maybe a little)… I’m just saying be careful, especially to newer designers. Even if your talent and work kicks the butt of others, you may not be taken seriously if you claim GIMP as your main program.

    -1
  45. 64

    Gimp has no chance vs. Photoshop.

    I do not know why you all avoid the topic of illegal downloads of Photoshop. Adobe and Microsoft could easily code software that MUST be legal. But they don’t. The fact is, illegal software is positive for companies producing them when you use it for home use. That just means that you will get used to that software, and then once you are employed you will ask your boss to buy that software. When big software companies display usage percentage, they do not say % of legal. Microsoft says that 95% of computers are running Windows. That’s world domination, who cares how many are illegal.

    On a company/business level, legal software is a must. Company that uses Photoshop can make money to pay for it as well. As for the price of 1000€, yes it is expensive, but that is your MAIN WORKING TOOL. Can you imagine how much money does it take to equip a surgeon with quality tools and equipment? Policeman? Hell, even the cashier lady working in the local store has equipment worth more than 1000€ at her disposal.

    So for home use: Gimp is as free as is PS. That’s a duel Gimp cannot win. And on professional use: 1000€ is a small price to pay.

    +3
  46. 65

    Yes. Please more about Gimp and Inkscape! Please!

    0
  47. 66

    Barry Schwartz

    April 3rd, 2009 7:35 am

    Two more plugins: greycstoration and (a remarkable touchup tool) resynthesizer.

    0
  48. 67

    Think I’ll stick with Photoshop.

    While I like the open source/free stuff I find that they are just not advanced enough or have the support to develop at the same rate.

    0
  49. 68

    The pros are already using Photoshop. For the rest of us, GIMP does some great things to improve our photos and create nice looking graphics. There’s a learning curve, to be sure, but it’s will worth the effort.

    0
  50. 69

    The part about the windows folder is wrong. You actually are going to want to put all the plug-ins (etc.) that you download into the C:/Users/%username%/.gimp-2.6/ folders. That way you keep your downloaded ones separate from the ones that come preinstalled. :)

    As far as replacing PS goes, I doubt it. It’s an excellent alternative if you can’t afford PS and want to do some graphic work, or can’t justify buying PS for what you want to do, but it doesn’t have near all the features PS does.

    0
  51. 70

    GIMP’s problem is not functionality, but the sodding user interface. Most of the stuff mentioned in the article is fluff, and even with hacks to get the panels to behave you still don’t end up with a usable program.

    Being a big proponent of free software, GIMP has been a sore spot for ages. It’s always being touted as being able to replace Photoshop, and it certainly looks it – unless you try to do something with it. And by this I mean “work with it”. Not draw a demo gradient.

    It doesn’t matter if PS is an “actual” or a “de facto” standard – no graphics package stands a proper chance of being adopted by those people you need for even the faintest idea of a critical mass if it denies Photoshop’s reign (and, therefore, eternal legacy).

    The sad thing is that these things shouldn’t be hard to fix – it’s all in keyboard shortcuts and the like, all interface. We all know the engine itself is primo, but deviating from sensible ways of doing sth (read: do it like Photoshop because everyone knows it*) is stupid and makes people specialize in irrelevant niche silos.

    The problem is that there is no consistency with Photoshop – like it or not, PS is the gold standard everything is necessarily measured against. Not for the functionality, but for the flow.

    GIMP’s existence makes it so much harder for the open source community to come up with a feasible free imaging solution because folks always point to GIMP and say, “but there is a free photoshop”.

    GIMP needs to die for open source imaging to prosper.
    This shit has been going on for far too long.

    * One might argue that “well, we like to do it our own way blah blah” – that’s fine, but counterproductive to what we call “reality” – don’t make the mistake thinking GIMP is to Photoshop as vi is to TextMate. vi can be the freak choice till the cows come home and it’s just fine, because you’re dealing with text. Not being able to work with the industry standard (Photoshop and PSDs) is a hindrance, not a neat personal preference gimmick.

    0
    • 71

      You’re spot on. I am starting in the web business as freelancer and I have zero money to buy PS (and in my country they sell it WAY more expensive, almost impossible to buy if you’re not a company). I downloaded an illegal PS and worked with it for months… until I realized I just can’t use illegal software to work with serious clients, so I just switched to open source alternatives: Ubuntu, OpenOffice and… GIMP.

      Man, what a horrible unusable piece of software GIMP is. Sorry fanboys, but is the truth. The GUI is just horrible, the gradient system is slow and painful, no layer grouping??? WTF?? you just end with a bunch of messy layers with no order whatsoever, to apply effects (drop shadow) you must duplicate the layer…. it just can’t compete with PS, at least in usability and ease of use.

      For so many years there have been a lot of people complaining about GIMP for a lot of things, it has the potential to become a real PS alternative, but as it is now is just a waste of time. Maybe if some team organize themselves and create the GIMP 3 solving all of these problems, I bet PS will have then a real competitor and, as we all know competition is good.

      I know currently there’s a team for “GIMP UI redesign project” (http://gui.gimp.org/index.php/GIMP_UI_Redesign#team) but IDK what are they doing, I hope they bring us something really useful soon…

      0
      • 72

        I reply to myself: I just read the features of the upcoming GIMP 2.8 and they are finally including layer groups, layer locking, resources tagging and a lot more cool features… hope to see a release soon.

        Keep the hard work GIMP team!!! We need a respectable and usable software! Save the GIMP from the limbo where it resides now!!!

        0
        • 73

          Perhaps you misunderstand the difficulty of reproducing the features of a pricey, complex commercial application totally for free. If you’re so enthusiastic, learn how to program and contribute yourself. “No layer grouping??? WTF???” Perhaps you’re in the wrong career field. I think diplomacy may be your true calling. I know I find myself that crying and screaming and throwing a tantrum when someone’s gift is not EXACTLY what you wanted to be incredibly effective. Granted, I’m two and a half years old and a member of a royal family, but it’s worked for me.

          +1
  52. 74

    I wish there was a good alternative to Adobe Fireworks – As a software developer and not a graphic designer, I find Fireworks more in-line with what I need from a graphics tool.

    If anyone knows of a good Fireworks alternative for the Mac, I would love to hear about it…

    0
  53. 75

    GIMP is indeed worthy and good tool for personal use and for amateurs, but if you are professional, then the money for photoshop is worth it.
    People, who complain about the price, have and never will buy it, because they dont make living by using adobe products. If you would, then you would understand, thats the price is just fine.

    0
  54. 76

    This sites is great. You guys rock… I’m an RSS subscriber from Spain and this is one of my favorite sites. I love it.

    Maybe you guys can make a little tutorial about how to use GIMP. I mean, a little tutorial on the most common uses, like how to apply shadows or make some banners.

    Anyway, greetings from the Canary Islands :-)

    0
  55. 77

    Does this version of GIMP has the feature to export using MATTE ? The ones I used didn’t have this so I had to quit this program.

    0
  56. 78

    Uh, what good is the CMYK color space without CIE LAB and color management? The GIMP is a #FAIL for print design unless you just don’t happen to care what colors your design turn out to be on press.

    0
  57. 79

    Make sure to check out interhuss.com/gimp-brushes for Gimp Brushes. And some other Gimp resources.

    0
  58. 80

    Not An Adobe Employee

    April 3rd, 2009 10:21 am

    GIMP is terrible. You should never use GIMP. Photoshop is much better.

    -4
  59. 82

    Not an employee of Adobe

    April 3rd, 2009 10:22 am

    GIMP sucks. Use Photoshop. It’s way better.

    -4
  60. 83

    Definitely not an employee of Adobe

    April 3rd, 2009 10:22 am

    Don’t use the GIMP, it’s terrible. Use Photoshop instead.

    -5
  61. 84

    Leonardo B. Lopes

    April 3rd, 2009 10:32 am

    I was really happy to know I could have an alternative way to make my graphics.
    So, I gave GIMP a shot.

    Well, I think I’ll keep Photoshop… Why?

    First of all: using photoshop plugins with PSPI made GIMP crash… I followed several support measures, and still no success.

    Second: GEGL Operations made GIMP crash. I found NO measures for this problem.

    Third: I downloaded Script-fu by mistake, because I wanted layer effects preview and It doesn’t have any. THEN, I tried the one with the preview, Python, which, ODDLY, didn’t work. Also, NO sollutions.

    Is that my Windows XP 32 SP3? If it is, I’ll wait till GIMP starts working on this. I am really sad that it didn’t work well, because I really liked the “pen speed” effects, something my PS CS3 doenst have.

    I’ll stay with the group that alledges “too many bugs”. Yes, that’s far too many bugs for my first one hour usage.

    0
  62. 85

    graphicartist2k5

    April 3rd, 2009 10:32 am

    gee, so there are STILL people trying to win over those of us who use photoshop to using the gimp? let me give you a HUGE clue: IT’S NOT GONNA HAPPEN! why? because no matter WHAT is done to the gimp, it’s not gonna replace photoshop, and it’s not gonna be the graphic design standard. it’s just not. let’s move on with our life now, and stop with trying to convince everyone that the gimp rocks, when it’s not even REMOTELY close to rocking.

    -2
  63. 86

    Blending options, even hacked together blending options, will be appreciated.
    My biggest issue with the gimp is how limited the typography menu is. Does anyone know of any plugins to add control in that area?

    0
  64. 87

    Do any of you people make a living where using a photo manipulation program on a daily basis are concerned?

    I am a professional photographer and have only used The GIMP the past 9+ years for my photo editing and for all of my collages, posters, and composites. (Inkscape used for the logos). None of my clients have complained about a photo or product they have received from me, never. Not for color, not for quality, and not for design, must not be too bad of a program :)

    BTW, I’ve had several PS users contact me to find out how I did something, esp on the posters, collages, and composites. Turns out a lot of it was with a simple built-in filter in The GIMP, but required either 3-4 steps or you had to pay for a plug-in for PS to do the same thing.

    +2
  65. 88

    Man, how handy is the animation hint! I have spend a whole days trying to make an animated banner in GIMP.. hope this plugin helps me.

    0
  66. 89

    totally agree with Daemon

    0
  67. 90

    No CMYK adjustment support means this program isn’t for designers or production artists. If I ask you to supply me with an image that has the yellow drop off at 2%, you will have a very hard time doing that with the GIMP. So it’s ok for web stuff, but not for real work.

    -2
  68. 91

    I agree with what people have written earlier, the problem with Gimp is not the engine or the features, it is the bad UX.

    I will def. give it a try after reading this article. If it can do masking like PS, it is worth a star or two.

    @brian Being the only designer (and Adobe user) in a large open source company, I am really interested in seeing your work or even tutorials. You should publish your work link somewhere.

    0
  69. 92

    You may call me blasphemous but they should rename gimp to something more professional and appealing to the masses and also change that stupid logo.

    Just some disposable constructive criticism.

    0
  70. 93

    I love open source and run Linux exclusively at home and the office, but I have to agree with ak. GIMP’s interface really blows, and it doesn’t even come close to Photoshop in terms of workflow. We’re not talking features here, we’re talking about workflow. This is the same reason Blender will lag behind Maya/Max/XSI, no matter how many features are added under the hood. And unfortunately, I understand that the Gimp developers are pretty happy with Gimp’s workflow and are not motivated to change it.

    Gimp does stand in the way of progress for imaging tools on Open Source platforms. Hopefully someday there will be another contender whose developers are as concerned with workflow and easy of use as they are with features.

    Great article though… thanks for the info, if only to keep tracking where Gimp’s current stage of development is.

    0
  71. 94

    I’d like to suggest one (minor) tweak to GIMP:

    Stop making me feel like an idiot whenever I mention it to a layperson. If I was to realistically make a push within my organization to replace our mutltitude of Photoshop licenses with GIMP, that effort will require a certain amount of communication with the bosses and beancounters. I’m busy, I don’t want to bother explaining the name over and over.

    0
  72. 95
  73. 96

    Yes, PS is still more powerfull, but Gimp is a 17 Mb program, VS more than 400Mb of PS, GIMP is Free and is not so far to the professionals nedds

    0
  74. 97

    Great article! I’ve used Photoshop for probably 10 years, the GiMP for about 5 years (in Linux and Windows). GiMP gets better all the time, but the lack of CMYK support has always been a major drawback for doing production work other than on the Web. I’m looking forward to trying that Separate+ plugin.

    Some people have trouble with the name GiMP. I feel your pain. Imagine me, working with people who have disabilities and talking about this program. I’ve had to backpedal quickly a few times to explain.

    If you apply yourself to learning it well, the GiMP can indeed be an acceptable substitute for Photoshop. Those who say it isn’t can afford to say so, because they can afford to pay (or have someone else pay) for a program that had better be good if you’re going to charge several hundred US dollars for it. What they may forget is that many people in the world have great talent and not much money, and for that reason the GiMP is already a serious contender for those who may never be able to afford Photoshop. In between, Paint Shop Pro is a cheaper but excellent option — and there are others (Polyview, Irfanview) that are amazingly good for a lot of simple tasks. In some ways, because they’re small and fast, they’re even better than Photoshop.

    Photoshop is a Very Big Gun. For the times I don’t need things like the Healing Brush (which nobody else does as well as Adobe), I’m perfectly happy to keep working in Linux and open up The GiMP. Yes, the user interface problems are a factor, but they don’t slow me down much now that I’m familiar with the way it works.

    I’m grateful for the tips. Keep ‘em coming!

    +2
  75. 98

    Caesar Tjalbo

    April 3rd, 2009 1:22 pm

    My software is all legal. I don’t have Photoshop because it’s too expensive and I’m not a professional. GIMP works for me, I’ve spent some time learning an ancient version of Paint Shop Pro and had no particular difficulties switching to PS (version 6 I believe it was) and my updated modest skills were then transferable to GIMP too.

    Use PS or another commercial program if you have a need and means, don’t slack off GIMP if you’re not using it and don’t pay for a commercial program you’re using. Especially not if you lack the skills to be worthy a serious graphics manipulation program.

    GIMP satisfies me in that it’s still more powerful than I have the ability to unleash, GIMP dissatisfies in its user interface. As far as I’m concerned the developers drop GTK altogether.

    0
  76. 99

    Everyone now and then I enthusiastically install GIMP … only to uninstall it shortly after. Surely someone can helpthat project become a serious contender to photoshop. At least for me … it’s brain damage.

    0
  77. 100

    Great review! Though I think people are missing the point. This is simply an alternative for those who can’t afford photoshop. It is a good find for those who just want to do simple editing or digital coloring. I got into art programs at a young age and even stuff like Painter4 was ” too expensive” for my family to want to purchase. I feel bad for the kid (or adult) that wants to learn photoshop but has limited options and funds. This is a wonderful middle ground.

    I probably would not use it for professional use since I do own a copy of photoshop, but I wouldn’t turn a blind eye to it either. Having knowledge of all graphic editing programs is a good way to be.

    +2
  78. 101

    GiMP looks great for freeware, but I find a hang up with the CMYK usage for print. Don’t get me wrong, I think that this is great for people to get a feel for graphic manipulation, and if you can make a living with it great. However, I think I’m going to stick with PS for a while, it’s user friendly off the jump, and most software (that’s not freeware) is expensive. You want quality you pay for quality.

    0
  79. 102

    #9: get photo effing shop!
    Simply put, gIMP is, well, gimpy! nuff sed!

    -2
  80. 103

    GIMP has no Usability whatsoever. A waste of code.

    -4
  81. 104

    I’m sorry if I don’t get this (I’m a beginner) but can we use photoshop and illustrator brushes using that plug-in? If so, how? I see awesome ps & illustrator brushes that I REALLY want to use but I can’t buy ps :(

    0
  82. 105

    Michael Grech

    April 3rd, 2009 3:47 pm

    Gimp is just as good if not better than photoshop. web designers need to stop being such elitist and realize there are plenty of great free open-source alternatives. Especially ppl from the Mac camp, you folks seem to think unless its overpriced and comes in a fancy package its not “professional” what a load of sh*t.

    +1
  83. 106

    It’s just funny that you used Debian to make the screenshots whereas the title is Handy Tweaks To Make GIMP Replace Photoshop. Don’t you know that Photoshop doesn’t run under Linux?

    I have to approve lalalawl’s opinion: GIMP has not a trickle of the usability that Photoshop has got. There’s potential but they don’t make sth. out of it!

    -1
  84. 107

    Gimp is beyond awkward to use, with terrible usability. Can’t believe you took the time to write up these inconsequential (to its overall unusability) tweaks.

    -2
  85. 108

    Great post.

    You addressed many (all?) of the reasons I stopped using GIMP a version or four back — and possibly the only reason I remain tied to Windows/Vista.

    0
  86. 109

    Beyond the lack of cmyk support the biggest disadvantage of the Gimp is text-editing, its way too difficult. However the Gimp’s antialiasing can be better then photoshop for web designers.

    I personally think, many of the professionals are trained “conditioned” from school to use adobe products. Its a good tactics that adobe sells its products to schools/students for free or much cheaper, and when youre out and would make a living of it, they ask $1000 for a software.

    And its like a drug, hard to change your habbits, and start to use Gimp.

    I think, the Gimp would help itself by building more a photoshop-like user interface, not because thats the best, but because then it would be easier to switch, even for pros.

    On the other hand i understand that as Gimp is not a commercial product, theres not much intention to fight for clients.

    0
  87. 110

    Some random thoughts of my own.

    Some years ago I made a decision to solely use Gimp instead of Photoshop, partially because Windows became uninteresting and inefficient for my computing. I’m not a professional even though I at times do serious layout works for some of our clients, logos and brochures. My decision also became an interesting experiment, because when I recently tried to use Photoshop, actually the very same version, I became frustrated when I couldn’t remember the routines I’ve been used to. I actually transferred the photos/pictures to my Linux working station and got it done in Gimp. This doesn’t mean Gimp is better, it only illustrates the importance of habits. Standards are many times not very well designed but it’s a question of being used to them and hence they stick with us.

    Some use the phrase “serious work” as distinguishing mark between the two. My comment to that is that you really have to be a professional, not just in photo, but also with deep knowledge of the software, and equipped with hardware, like screens and printers, capable of reproducing exactly what your calibrations are supposed to accomplish. This makes the whole idea about “serious work” irrelevant for most. “Serious work” was in one comment also used to degrade the seriousness of Webb design, but when doing so remember that the result in most cases will be read and looked at by people using screens so off a true colour experience that even half-blind photographers would puke. Thus the 1 or 2 % adjustments become irrelevant besides producing a overall well balanced and other parts of editing more important. Does that make such work less “serious”? I don’t think so. I suspect it’s more a question of superficially pumped up egos than an objective analysis.

    Photoshop is faster and its engine makes far better use of GPU resources than Gimp. Without speculating about whether this might change few are working with such a load of data, and if they do they do well in checking their hardware capabilities before looking into the software part of the question. The total cost that would justify Photoshop is higher than the price for the software by itself. If your printer can’t reproduce exactly what you achieve in Photoshop it becomes nothing more than a imaginable superiority.

    The Photoshop line of products represent software of excellent quality, and for some this might be the only valid choice at the moment. I’ve no argument about that. I do though believe we see too many vague arguments, and unfortunately at times unfounded. My own experience with Gimp’s GUI might of course differ from how a Windows user experience it, even more so when I’m using a tiling window manager with a more predominant keyboard usage.

    +3
  88. 111

    I do all my artwork in gimp and other open-source software, (http://griatch-art.deviantart.com/) and I find that It does what I need it to do. I never understood why people found it hard to use, one obviously has to learn the interface, but ever since version 2.0 or so (before that I agree it was no fun), it is quite intuitive to use, not to mention that you can customize in very powerful ways to match your workflow.

    Anyway, thanks for an interesting article. You should probably mention that GIMP animates just fine (flipbook-style) also without GAP. The Gimp Animation Package is needed for more advanced animation features like fades, movements along paths and so on.

    GEGL is more important than really comes across — it is the next-generation gfx-core for gimp, and will really do much for the program (also compared to PS, if one wants to do that comparison). It is not really a selling point at this moment in time though, there is a reason it is not activated by default yet, its power will come into play in future versions and many of its functions seem still a bit unstable in current gimp.
    .
    Griatch

    +2
  89. 112

    GIMP will never work in conjection with other Adobe products as Photoshop does.
    Photoshop is not expensive, expecially if you’re a student.
    It’a all down to what you want to pay, and if you think it’s worth it.

    0
  90. 113

    can GIMP be adapted to Fireworks CS3 or CS4?

    0
  91. 114

    Hi,

    Can you create Groups of Layers (folders where you put several layers in) in Gimp … didnt find the option …. thank you ?

    0
  92. 115

    Gimp and Inkscape rulez! More about them pls! And thanx for this article!

    “GimPhoto has a slightly more appealing interface, but GIMPshop is based on a newer version of GIMP”
    If i know well the GimpShop wasn’t updated since 2006. The GimPhoto is based on newer version of Gimp (v2.6.4). Or if i’m wrong where i can download the newest GimpShop?

    regards, zoli

    0
  93. 116

    There’s already a program called GIMP-Shop that does a lot of reconfiguring to make the menus organized in a similar way to photoshop. Although I don’t know if it has been done for the latest version. I’m a huge fan of GIMP, mostly because I don’t have a lot of $$ to spend on software.

    +1
  94. 117

    Why would you need to install a plugin to do separations? CYMK and multitone (duotone) can be easily achieved using the built in decomposition. If you are using colored paper you can allow decomposition to consider that as the base color for a duotone or monotone separation.

    There is a separate filter to create simulations of halftone screen patterns which allows for a thorough check of potential lpi limitations and moire patterns produced by bad scans interacting with the screen pattern.

    +1
  95. 118

    Barry Schwartz

    April 4th, 2009 11:53 am

    I use GIMP because it’s what exists, but think I might want to mention a deficiency of GIMP that seldom is mentioned, I guess because few people are serious font collectors.

    GIMP uses fontconfig in an entirely inappropriate way for the task at hand, and as a result it can’t find many fonts, instead thinking they are entirely different fonts. It’s disgracefully bad behavior; no program whose user has a specific font in mind (rather than some randomly selected font meeting minimum language/script/style requirements), should use fontconfig’s pattern matcher.

    Fontconfig is good at getting a list of installed fonts and can be used for that, as an alternative to kpathsearch. But no way should programs like GIMP, Inkscape, etc., be using the pattern matcher.

    I don’t know how this could have happened unless no important developers of these programs actually have a serious font collection. Obviously, this is not a problem from which Adobe suffers, because fonts are at the core of Adobe’s existence, and they are suppliers of a number of the font families that GIMP mishandles.

    0
  96. 119

    graphicartist2k5

    April 4th, 2009 12:17 pm

    “i use gimp because it’s what exists”? what the hell does that mean? photoshop exists as well, and it stomps the gimp’s ass into the ground. i TOTALLY agree with whoever posted on here that they SERIOUSLY need to change the name and logo of the program if they even want to consider taking on photoshop. how professional would it really be to tell your boss that you’re gonna use an open-source program that doesn’t have cmyk print capabilities, isn’t the industry standard in graphic design, and is an overall weak program to create the designs he wants you to create? mull that one over for awhile. i know the gimp is free, but it’s also EXTREMELY weak when compared to photoshop. photoshop isn’t just an image editing program, but can be used to create just about every form of graphic design out there, from web pages to logos, and it comes with imageready, which is a GREAT program for slicing up the web page layout created in photoshop, as well as creating animated gifs. it can also code web pages automatically. can the gimp do ANY of those things? i think not.

    -1
  97. 120

    you probably forgot to mention one of the most important gimp sites on the net. gimpusers.com has the most professional tutorials and is very good at news…

    thanks for the article – has been informative to me

    +1
  98. 121

    great article, we want more open source articles here!
    don’t blame it for missing features or bugs, it’s free like in free beer and free speech.
    german readers check out a small tutorial for creating great png’s for typo3:
    Link I like the gimp and use it in everyday webdesign purposes. gimp can do better compression (jpg/png) than Adobe PS or FW can do.
    @graphicartist2k5: i do my animated gifs in gimp, and yes:u are right: it cannot do xhtml-code ;-)

    0
  99. 122

    THANK YOU!

    0
  100. 123

    Andrew Abogado

    April 5th, 2009 7:37 am

    Great post. Haven’t imagined GIMP related topic to be posted here. Here’s a great review though to those who want to try out GIMP, Suite freedom: A review of GIMP 2.6.4 – Ars Technica.

    Thanks for this brave post.

    +1

  1. 1

    are you 12?

    +18
  2. 2

    you’re either 12, or the worst troll ever.

    +11
  3. 3

    I have been using Photoshop for years, but about 2 years ago I switched to Gimp. At first it was hard to use for me but now I use only open source software to design websites and other graphic things. Now I am very familiar with it. You can’t compare them if you have been using one for years and another one for less than an hour.

    +7
  4. 4

    I love GIMP and I don’t want to spend so much money for Paintshop as I use it for personal purposes only. That simple! Thanks for the article.

    +4
  5. 5

    i am a designer, illustrator and photgrapher and have used photoshop since 1995 with windows 95 – i love photoshop but recently its gotten too big with crap i never use and way too much Internet communication and attempts to sell me stuff through the software – i hate software that constantly keeps doors open to the net – i switched to photoshop elements recently because i hate the new cs versions but the internet crap turned me off – thankfully i found GIMP and will never go back – it does everything i want – as a professional artist i dont need all the amateurish filters and instant fixes of photoshop, just the essential tools – and switching to GIMP has got me to switch to linux so now my computer runs faster than ever with much better screen graphics, brighter and sharper than windows mushy graphics – i love GIMP and i love LINUX

    +4
  6. 6

    Not everybody has the coin to buy such expensive software as PS.

    +4
  7. 7

    My rule is simple. I use Gimp because it is FREE and I do not want to use PIRATED version of Adobe software.

    +3
  8. 8

    TX CHL Instructor

    April 7th, 2009 10:38 am

    I have found GIMP to be very useful for the limited photo production that I use. One of the things that I do for my CHL students is provide passport photos to the specifications of the Texas DPS (they are a bit pickier than the passport office). I can take the photos of everyone in class (typically 32 in a class), and lay them out, knock out the background, and adjust the brightness and contrast for optimal appearance on my dye-sub printer, and have them all done in about 30 minutes, at a materials cost of roughly 25 cents per student (2 photos each).

    Some of the upgrades to GIMP have been a bit confusing, but lately, it’s gotten pretty good.

    The PS folks who so vehemently diss GIMP are basically snobs. Ok, PS is a good tool, and probably worth the money. GIMP is also a good tool, does everything I need in a photo processor, and the only cost is the time to download it. If you want to run around with your nose in the air, fine, but I will continue to use GIMP. Kinda reminds me of the folks that used to belittle me for playing my violin with a fiberglass bow, when I was playing better with my ‘cheap’ bow than they could with their expensive genuine pernambuco sticks. La-de-da.

    I was very glad to see Smashing do a GIMP article, and I hope to see more.

    BTW, the best tutorial for GIMP that I have found so far is “Grokking the GIMP” (google it). It’s based on a fairly old version, but the techniques still work.

    +3
  9. 9

    FreelancerCrowd

    April 3rd, 2009 2:26 am

    Perhaps not the first choice for print and press, but probably the best alternative for anything else.

    +3
  10. 10

    Gimp has no chance vs. Photoshop.

    I do not know why you all avoid the topic of illegal downloads of Photoshop. Adobe and Microsoft could easily code software that MUST be legal. But they don’t. The fact is, illegal software is positive for companies producing them when you use it for home use. That just means that you will get used to that software, and then once you are employed you will ask your boss to buy that software. When big software companies display usage percentage, they do not say % of legal. Microsoft says that 95% of computers are running Windows. That’s world domination, who cares how many are illegal.

    On a company/business level, legal software is a must. Company that uses Photoshop can make money to pay for it as well. As for the price of 1000€, yes it is expensive, but that is your MAIN WORKING TOOL. Can you imagine how much money does it take to equip a surgeon with quality tools and equipment? Policeman? Hell, even the cashier lady working in the local store has equipment worth more than 1000€ at her disposal.

    So for home use: Gimp is as free as is PS. That’s a duel Gimp cannot win. And on professional use: 1000€ is a small price to pay.

    +3
  11. 11

    Some random thoughts of my own.

    Some years ago I made a decision to solely use Gimp instead of Photoshop, partially because Windows became uninteresting and inefficient for my computing. I’m not a professional even though I at times do serious layout works for some of our clients, logos and brochures. My decision also became an interesting experiment, because when I recently tried to use Photoshop, actually the very same version, I became frustrated when I couldn’t remember the routines I’ve been used to. I actually transferred the photos/pictures to my Linux working station and got it done in Gimp. This doesn’t mean Gimp is better, it only illustrates the importance of habits. Standards are many times not very well designed but it’s a question of being used to them and hence they stick with us.

    Some use the phrase “serious work” as distinguishing mark between the two. My comment to that is that you really have to be a professional, not just in photo, but also with deep knowledge of the software, and equipped with hardware, like screens and printers, capable of reproducing exactly what your calibrations are supposed to accomplish. This makes the whole idea about “serious work” irrelevant for most. “Serious work” was in one comment also used to degrade the seriousness of Webb design, but when doing so remember that the result in most cases will be read and looked at by people using screens so off a true colour experience that even half-blind photographers would puke. Thus the 1 or 2 % adjustments become irrelevant besides producing a overall well balanced and other parts of editing more important. Does that make such work less “serious”? I don’t think so. I suspect it’s more a question of superficially pumped up egos than an objective analysis.

    Photoshop is faster and its engine makes far better use of GPU resources than Gimp. Without speculating about whether this might change few are working with such a load of data, and if they do they do well in checking their hardware capabilities before looking into the software part of the question. The total cost that would justify Photoshop is higher than the price for the software by itself. If your printer can’t reproduce exactly what you achieve in Photoshop it becomes nothing more than a imaginable superiority.

    The Photoshop line of products represent software of excellent quality, and for some this might be the only valid choice at the moment. I’ve no argument about that. I do though believe we see too many vague arguments, and unfortunately at times unfounded. My own experience with Gimp’s GUI might of course differ from how a Windows user experience it, even more so when I’m using a tiling window manager with a more predominant keyboard usage.

    +3
  12. 12

    Uh, no it’s not. That’s not all that much when you’re talking about professional software; it lasts forever.

    I don’t use photoshop, I use GIMP, as it isn’t worth the money to me, however, if I had the money to spare I would definitely buy photoshop. The layer effects plugin here for example is not the same thing in photoshop. In photoshop you can automatically add drop shadow or such, here you’d have to go make a new one each time you change the layer.

    +3
  13. 13

    Photoshop is expensive. Period. It’s bloated, too.

    But the The Gimp is just .. well, gimpy.

    •No Adjustment Layers
    This is huge. In order to get the same functionality you must DUPLICATE the base layer, apply the filter or adjustment, and repeat until your comp is done, otherwise there is no going back. This is a big memory waster that is easy to make an irreparable mistake with.

    •No 16-bit support
    I suppose the lack of adjustment layers isn’t that big a deal without 16- and 32-bit support, at least it’s not going to be as inefficient. So I guess utilizing 1/256 the data is worth it? Oh well. Shadow and Hilight detail isn’t THAT important, right?

    •No CMY*K
    Separations? Really? Your prepress guy is going to LOVE that. No way to trap. No way to isolate K. No way to control black generation. No way to do much of anything of value until you load it back into Photoshop!

    I can 100% guarantee you, that if you fancy yourself a graphic artist and you deliver a .zip containing four greyscale images of a logo without trap or isolation you’ll do nothing but provide lots of laughs from the printer. In fact, submitting such a file is no better than an RGB. At least an RGB won’t need to be recomposed.

    So sure, I guess the GIMP is good for lightening the mood for your over stressed prepress department, I can hear the banter now, but you’re going to look very unprofessional. It will cost you more. And when they are asked who they would recommend for a graphic artist, it will not be you.

    •Awkward color management
    Color management is there… kind of.

    •Limited Hue/Sat adjustment
    This is the tool I use the most for making the hardest corrections happen. Noise reduction, chromatic aberration, selective color adjustment, vibrancy… but with gimp I’m stuck with only 6 colors to choose from with no feather, just a gimpy “overlap”. This makes hue/sat pretty useless. Sure, you could build a mask, duplicate the layer, apply the hue/sat adjustment, but I’d like to see Photoshop’s Hue/Sat tool improved! Using The Gimp’s hue/sat is just far too limiting.

    Why is the gimp so terrible, yet other (unrelated) GPL software so great? It might be in The GIMP users themselves. GIMP is hailed as such a perfect platform, there seems to be little room for improvement. However, the above features are not minor ones, and are used by photographers and/or graphic artists on a daily basis. GIMP users are so busy pointing out how great the GIMP is, that it can do so much that Photoshop can, that there is very little talk about the significant features that it’s lacking.

    You don’t see the Blender community saying that Blender can do everything XSI or Maya can do. Because it can’t, and they are not so delusional to think it can. Instead they focus on improving the package so that it can perform rather than inflating on what Blender is already good at.

    People who advocate the GIMP clearly are either in denial, or don’t understand the value of things like Adjustment Layers and 16- and 32-bit imaging or native CMYK and LAB.

    There certainly are many, many bells and whistles that are compared to Photoshop, and compared to Photoshop LOUDLY. But, it’s not the bloat that I’m interested in, it’s the functionality.

    +3
  14. 14

    I used Adobe products for a long time, and wrote plugins for many of them. When I started using Linux more, I began using Gimp for simple things, out of convenience. After a while, I found that I would try using Photoshop, but switch over to Gimp, because some things seemed easier.

    So, I began learning more, a little at a time. It seemed like it could do pretty much everything I needed, although I thought Photoshop was quicker and easier. But, after a while, Gimp began to make more sense than Photoshop. In fact, when I use Photoshop, I now find it lacking in what I consider basic functionality.

    This doesn’t mean I think Gimp is better – it just drove home, once more, that you get used to one or another pieces of software, or operating systems, and you begin to think that its features are the only way to go.

    Yes, there are things you can do in photoshop that you can’t do in gimp, at least not in the same way. But the same holds true for the other direction; there are things you can do easily in Gimp that you can’t do in photoshop the same way.

    For example, Gimp doesn’t have so many layer properties, like backgrounds, outlines, etc. This doesn’t mean you can’t do the same thing, it’s just not a layer property. If this way of doing things is worth the money you pay, and worth being tied to Windows, then stick with it. I use Gimp on Windows, Linux, and Mac. All for free. All without learning new ways to do things. So, I have to create my own background or outline; big deal.

    +3
  15. 15

    Lasts forever? No software really lasts forever unless you get free upgrades forever.

    +3
  16. 16

    People do not realise that most free software is often many many years behind mainstream competitors. The millions of dollars and years of development from hundreds of programmers and designers it took to create PhotoShop, simply wont happen in GIMP for years to come. GIMP (the name really should be changed, gimp is usually a slang term for a handicapped person!) is a great program for beginners or people who just like to do hobby stuff. As far as using in as a tool for a professional graphics designer, sadly no.

    Adobe offers a leasing program for people who can’t afford it, the Master Collection is around $150USD/month. That is cheap for someone who is using the software to make money. Simply lease it until you make enough money to buy it flat out. If you run your business correctly, this won’t be a problem.

    I have used both GIMP and PhotoShop extensively. PhotoShop graphics tend to be more “crisp and clear” whereas creating the same image in GIMP tended to lack in quality.

    I’m not trying to come across as a GIMP basher or PhotoShop promoter, I’m just giving my opinion. The dev’s at GIMP have done an excellent job in creating a free open-source design program.

    As far as the people saying they’re not going to download PhotoShop illegally, you don’t have to, download a fully functional 30-day trial from Adobe. In that 30-days, use the software to create images to sell at places like: http://www.designcrowd.com or http://www.freelancer.com, sites like that. After your trial is up you should’ve been able to make enough to either pay for the software in full or be able to pay for your first month’s lease. That’s what I did, it’s not that difficult. Stop having that “I CAN’T” attitude, you’re life will be much better if you stop thinking like that. This can be applied to many aspects of life, not just determining what image software to get.

    To squash any backlash comments about only having Linux. If your a professional designer, Windows 7 is around $100USD. I have dual boot Windows 7/Ubuntu Linux. I use Windows 7 for my Graphics Designing and Gaming, and Linux for programming and everything else. If you’re computer isn’t good enough for Windows 7 then your missing out. Computers and Laptops are extremely cheap now a days. If $400-600 is too much for you all at once, simply have patience and save $10+/week and you’ll have it eventually. It’s mathematically impossible for you not to own a new computer saving a certain amount each week or whenever you get paid.

    +2
  17. 17

    I do all my artwork in gimp and other open-source software, (http://griatch-art.deviantart.com/) and I find that It does what I need it to do. I never understood why people found it hard to use, one obviously has to learn the interface, but ever since version 2.0 or so (before that I agree it was no fun), it is quite intuitive to use, not to mention that you can customize in very powerful ways to match your workflow.

    Anyway, thanks for an interesting article. You should probably mention that GIMP animates just fine (flipbook-style) also without GAP. The Gimp Animation Package is needed for more advanced animation features like fades, movements along paths and so on.

    GEGL is more important than really comes across — it is the next-generation gfx-core for gimp, and will really do much for the program (also compared to PS, if one wants to do that comparison). It is not really a selling point at this moment in time though, there is a reason it is not activated by default yet, its power will come into play in future versions and many of its functions seem still a bit unstable in current gimp.
    .
    Griatch

    +2
  18. 18

    Great article! I’ve used Photoshop for probably 10 years, the GiMP for about 5 years (in Linux and Windows). GiMP gets better all the time, but the lack of CMYK support has always been a major drawback for doing production work other than on the Web. I’m looking forward to trying that Separate+ plugin.

    Some people have trouble with the name GiMP. I feel your pain. Imagine me, working with people who have disabilities and talking about this program. I’ve had to backpedal quickly a few times to explain.

    If you apply yourself to learning it well, the GiMP can indeed be an acceptable substitute for Photoshop. Those who say it isn’t can afford to say so, because they can afford to pay (or have someone else pay) for a program that had better be good if you’re going to charge several hundred US dollars for it. What they may forget is that many people in the world have great talent and not much money, and for that reason the GiMP is already a serious contender for those who may never be able to afford Photoshop. In between, Paint Shop Pro is a cheaper but excellent option — and there are others (Polyview, Irfanview) that are amazingly good for a lot of simple tasks. In some ways, because they’re small and fast, they’re even better than Photoshop.

    Photoshop is a Very Big Gun. For the times I don’t need things like the Healing Brush (which nobody else does as well as Adobe), I’m perfectly happy to keep working in Linux and open up The GiMP. Yes, the user interface problems are a factor, but they don’t slow me down much now that I’m familiar with the way it works.

    I’m grateful for the tips. Keep ‘em coming!

    +2
  19. 19

    Great review! Though I think people are missing the point. This is simply an alternative for those who can’t afford photoshop. It is a good find for those who just want to do simple editing or digital coloring. I got into art programs at a young age and even stuff like Painter4 was ” too expensive” for my family to want to purchase. I feel bad for the kid (or adult) that wants to learn photoshop but has limited options and funds. This is a wonderful middle ground.

    I probably would not use it for professional use since I do own a copy of photoshop, but I wouldn’t turn a blind eye to it either. Having knowledge of all graphic editing programs is a good way to be.

    +2
  20. 20

    Do any of you people make a living where using a photo manipulation program on a daily basis are concerned?

    I am a professional photographer and have only used The GIMP the past 9+ years for my photo editing and for all of my collages, posters, and composites. (Inkscape used for the logos). None of my clients have complained about a photo or product they have received from me, never. Not for color, not for quality, and not for design, must not be too bad of a program :)

    BTW, I’ve had several PS users contact me to find out how I did something, esp on the posters, collages, and composites. Turns out a lot of it was with a simple built-in filter in The GIMP, but required either 3-4 steps or you had to pay for a plug-in for PS to do the same thing.

    +2
  21. 21

    It’s amazing to see the hatred for this program here. I feel the same as many of the users here, but I must say – theGIMP is an amazing undertaking for a development team that doesn’t get paid for it.

    I understand that theGIMP isn’t up to snuff when it comes to professional editing, but I also believe that most of this stems from one factor – it’s lack of true CMYK color spaces. theGIMP with CMYK support would be like Photoshop 7 was – relatively unpolished and rough by today’s standards, but it WORKS.

    Granted – it needs polish, but as a GIMP user, it does put out decent work. I’ve used it to generate the major bulk of my works on a few occasions and simply done the color seps and CMYK conversion in PS later and it performs admirably, provided you decide to learn to use the program.

    +2
  22. 22

    I edit photos for our photography business and I’ve been using GIMP for years. I started using GIMP before it was even available for Windows so I had a Linux machine set up just for photo editing work. Yes, I’ve tried Photoshop and I didn’t like it because it was different from what I’m used to. How’s that for backwards? I also do photo restorations using the GIMP and I have never had anything but happy customers. I also use a Wacom tablet and I have never had any problems with it so maybe, Bob, you might have a driver issue? (Just a thought there) Though I do agree that the limited custom color palete can be a constraint but I’ve never not been able to do a job because of it.

    I think Photoshop is expensive but not out of line for professional software. I just simply can’t justify spending our company’s money when I can use what’s available for free and deliver results that our customers are always happy with.

    Though that’s all irrelevant to this page. Thanks to Blair Mathis for the great page and tips for expanding the usefulness of GIMP. I also agree that this free program has made some great improvements since it’s early days and no doubt will continue to improve.

    +2
  23. 23

    I’ve only just started editing pictures myself and I downloaded a trial of PS and I hated it! It’s practically impossible to use and manuever if you don’t know what your doing. It’s really complicated and way too fussy and drawn out. I also refuse to pay £700 for some software to smooth my skin out and make all my pictures look unrealistic and obviously edited. I’d much rather just take a bloody interesting pic and use real talent to create a stunning picture than pay extortionate amounts (in a reccession!!!) to make a fake pic with some software.

    I really could rant on forever about this but I wont.

    I like GIMP it’s easy to use and gets the simple tasks done and from the looks of things is constantly being updated and giving people new bits to add to it as they choose. I will most probably never shell out the cash for photoshop. If I got hold of it for free or for like £20 I might consider it however it’s very unlikely that will ever happen so it’s GIMP all the way for me. It’s free and gets the main task (I need it for) done. What more could I ask for?

    +2
  24. 24

    I understand that this article is over a year old but something caught my attention. Photoshop users are threatened by GIMP. I’ve been using Adobe products since 1994 and don’t understand this. Maybe I’ve been around them too long but I don’t see the problem with GIMP. Why would anyone want to say that GIMP is not comparable to Photoshop? It doesn’t matter if it is or not. The fact is that GIMP is a quality product. It works well for many things if you’re not the lazy and/or fearful type.

    If you’re really that dependent on the piece of software you are using, you might want to reconsider your worth in the idea of graphic design. If I had my way I’d force you all to use camera’s, exacto knives, and waxer machines in a darkroom full of emulsion stink for a month just to give you a clue to what industry you claim to be a part of.

    +2
  25. 25

    Yeah, Hollywood :)
    Hollywood use GIMP a lot in both the production of films (with a specially modified version of GIMP called CinePaint) and also in the creation of the film posters, etc.

    +2
  26. 26

    As a web programmer who often needs to whip up buttons, icons, play with photos etc., Photoshop is overkill and of course far to expensive to justify the outlay (no you cant just steal it if you are working for a respectable company). I personally find Gimp to be friendly and easy to use. Sometimes I can even open a PSD in Gimp and get better results out of it than I can in Photoshop.

    The split layout makes perfect sense with a desktop manager, a tool every professional computer user should become familiar with.

    I imagine that a significant amount of the hatred against the userability is simply people not familiar with it – people will pretty much spit acid at anything if it does not match what they are used to within 5 minutes – see the bitter hate piled on Linux, Mac or PC from those in opposing camps.

    +1
  27. 27

    Andrew Abogado

    April 5th, 2009 7:37 am

    Great post. Haven’t imagined GIMP related topic to be posted here. Here’s a great review though to those who want to try out GIMP, Suite freedom: A review of GIMP 2.6.4 – Ars Technica.

    Thanks for this brave post.

    +1
  28. 28

    Not even close to Photoshop. Personal opinion.

    +1
  29. 29

    you probably forgot to mention one of the most important gimp sites on the net. gimpusers.com has the most professional tutorials and is very good at news…

    thanks for the article – has been informative to me

    +1
  30. 30

    Why are all you PS users crapping on the GIMP? It’s like a rich kid beating up a poor kid because he’s poor. Why do you PS people care? GIMP’s not ever going to compete, won’t ever steal market share. Why act threatened?

    Hell, I hate the GIMP, and I still don’t understand this compulsion of PS fans to beat it up at every turn.

    +1

Leave a Comment

Yay! You've decided to leave a comment. That's fantastic! Please keep in mind that comments are moderated and rel="nofollow" is in use. So, please do not use a spammy keyword or a domain as your name, or it will be deleted. Let's have a personal and meaningful conversation instead. Thanks for dropping by!

↑ Back to top