Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

rileybrandt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 130 posts

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#31

Post by sanderjd »

Joeboy wrote: post #12
jordigh wrote: post #3

This reminds me of the endless bug reports we're getting right now about the Octave GUI not being indistinguishable from Matlab. Makes me wish people weren't so inflexible about the tiniest UI differences. It's difficult to please the converts.

> Makes me wish people weren't so inflexible about the tiniest UI differences. It's difficult to please the converts. I replaced Photoshop with Gimp years ago, but I still find Gimp incredibly painful to use. It accounts for a tiny proportion of my software use, but a massive proportion of my swearing. I use to think it was just down to being familiar with Photoshop, but I think I can only excuse it on that basis for…

It's often hard to tell the difference between bad UI and unfamiliar UI. Seems like most people agree on which side Gimp lands on. No idea which side Octave's GUI is on.

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#32

Post by dperfect »

pessimizer wrote: post #25

This is like using Vim-mode to switch to Emacs, or installing Lindows. If people could accept the trivial conventions of the software you're moving to ("How can I use GIMP? The hotkeys are different!") and stop treating it like a free badly-executed Photoshop clone, they might realize that it's really nice to work in. My problems with GIMP were the CMYK stuff and a few terminology issues. I really love the GIMP inter…

The thing you're missing is that the differences between GIMP and Photoshop are not just user interface idioms. I wish it were that simple (I'd love to switch to GIMP if I could). It's not a matter of "learning something new"; it's the fact that without real non-destructive editing features, GIMP is basically just an enhanced version of MS Paint in the hands of serious photographers and retouchers. Non-destructive editing is not a "nice to have" feature. It's quite literally a fundamental shift in methodology - and one that apparently the GIMP devs seem to be ignoring.

I know several professional photographers/retouchers, and for them, a typical Photoshop document has a single source layer (the original photo) on the bottom, and hundreds of adjustment layers (organized into folders) on top to create the final image. There's just no way to approach that power with GIMP.

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#33

Post by kyrra »

skrowl wrote: post #2

If you use Windows, consider Paint.NET ( http://www.getpaint.net ) instead of GIMP. It's much quicker (particularly the 4.0 beta builds) and has a much more Photoshop-like UI out of the box.

For OSX, Pixelmator[0] is a great tool for the price ($30). I've used Paint.NET a lot, but since being on OSX a lot more for my job, Pixelmator is definitely a step-above Paint.NET. But as always, Photoshop is the best out there.

[0] http://www.pixelmator.com/

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#34

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

dperfect wrote: post #14

If you're using Photoshop for the purpose it was designed for (editing photos, not illustration/painting from scratch), then GIMP is absolutely inferior in its current form. If you're making edits directly to source pixel layers (or even making duplicate flattened layers and working on those), you're doing it wrong. Photoshop is designed for non-destructive editing. An essential part of that is adjustment layers. Man…

I'd have to agree with this. I've never used Photoshop, but the destructiveness of GIMP is a pain. Sure, .xcf supports multiple layers, but I can't rotate a layer without doing so destructively.

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#35

Post by nomadcoop »

praeivis wrote: post #22
nomadcoop wrote: post #8

I haven't tried it myself so can't vouch for it but GimpShop ( http://www.gimpshop.com/ ) fills a similar niche.

I registered only to warn everyone even do not try gimpshop - it will install findwide mailware.

I'm glad you posted that before I installed it.

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#36

Post by plasticbugs »

nomadcoop wrote: post #8

I haven't tried it myself so can't vouch for it but GimpShop ( http://www.gimpshop.com/ ) fills a similar niche.

I originally created Gimpshop, but I'm not the jerk who owns that domain and added adware & spyware to the source. Sorry about that. I hate that this guy is out there making my fun little project into an abomination.

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#37

Post by k__ »

dperfect wrote: post #32
pessimizer wrote: post #25

This is like using Vim-mode to switch to Emacs, or installing Lindows. If people could accept the trivial conventions of the software you're moving to ("How can I use GIMP? The hotkeys are different!") and stop treating it like a free badly-executed Photoshop clone, they might realize that it's really nice to work in. My problems with GIMP were the CMYK stuff and a few terminology issues. I really love the GIMP inter…

The thing you're missing is that the differences between GIMP and Photoshop are not just user interface idioms. I wish it were that simple (I'd love to switch to GIMP if I could). It's not a matter of "learning something new"; it's the fact that without real non-destructive editing features, GIMP is basically just an enhanced version of MS Paint in the hands of serious photographers and retouchers. Non-destructive ed…

Shouldn't you know what you want to to, if you're a professional?

If you don't know what you want to accomplish, you need to experiment. This is when those non-destructive features come in handy, but if you know the goal and how to achieve it, they aren't necessary.

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#38

Post by dperfect »

k__ wrote: post #37
dperfect wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing you're missing is that the differences between GIMP and Photoshop are not just user interface idioms. I wish it were that simple (I'd love to switch to GIMP if I could). It's not a matter of "learning something new"; it's the fact that without real non-destructive editing features, GIMP is basically just an enhanced version of MS Paint in the hands of serious photographers and retouchers. Non-destructive ed…

Shouldn't you know what you want to to, if you're a professional? If you don't know what you want to accomplish, you need to experiment. This is when those non-destructive features come in handy, but if you know the goal and how to achieve it, they aren't necessary.

Non-destructive editing isn't about knowing or not knowing what you want.

If you're a professional coder, shouldn't you know exactly what you want to accomplish without needing to experiment? Why not then write the final version of your code all at once? Why use revision control?

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#39

Post by stan_rogers »

k__ wrote: post #37
dperfect wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing you're missing is that the differences between GIMP and Photoshop are not just user interface idioms. I wish it were that simple (I'd love to switch to GIMP if I could). It's not a matter of "learning something new"; it's the fact that without real non-destructive editing features, GIMP is basically just an enhanced version of MS Paint in the hands of serious photographers and retouchers. Non-destructive ed…

Shouldn't you know what you want to to, if you're a professional? If you don't know what you want to accomplish, you need to experiment. This is when those non-destructive features come in handy, but if you know the goal and how to achieve it, they aren't necessary.

You should know what you want to do, of course, but you are not usually the client unless you're a hobbyist (or a fine-art type, who is essentially a hobbyist who takes money in applause). Non-destructive editing is not optional. (A photographic file might typically have several tens of layers, and that's at the low end of the scale. Hundreds is not uncommon.)

Re: Switch from Photoshop to Gimp: Tips From a Pro

#40

Post by na85 »

k__ wrote: post #37
dperfect wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing you're missing is that the differences between GIMP and Photoshop are not just user interface idioms. I wish it were that simple (I'd love to switch to GIMP if I could). It's not a matter of "learning something new"; it's the fact that without real non-destructive editing features, GIMP is basically just an enhanced version of MS Paint in the hands of serious photographers and retouchers. Non-destructive ed…

Shouldn't you know what you want to to, if you're a professional? If you don't know what you want to accomplish, you need to experiment. This is when those non-destructive features come in handy, but if you know the goal and how to achieve it, they aren't necessary.

This post is a really poignant (if unintentional) example of how a lot of programmers/non-arty types have a fundamental misunderstanding about how graphic design works.

"Just do it right the first time" is such a maligned attitude when directed towards coders ("No, boss. I need to make revisions!"). Interesting that the perspective isn't being applied equally.

Shouldn't you know what you want to do, if you're a professional? If you don't know what you want to do, then you need git or other version control. If you know what you want to do, why do you need version control or patches?

Post reply on HN