On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Arun Venkataswamy <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Swapnil <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 01/30/2011 03:37 AM, Girish Venkatachalam wrote: >> > Even by a long mile I don't think gimp will match Photoshop. >> What made you think so? What's in PS that's not in GIMP? We use GIMP for >> all of our graphics. Please state the reasons. > > IMHO the difference between GIMP and Photoshop is just the difference > between Linux and Windows. Geeks will use GIMP and an non geek graphics
I am a Linux User from the days of RedHat 6.0, having nothing but Linux on my PC and Laptop. I am also an amateur photographer, heading my company's Photography Club. Though not a pro, I do some amount of photo editing for in-house online publications and corporate blogs. With this premise: The following are my observations: "The Gimp" is great. I have been able to script it and customize it for my use. I have been using it for about 7 years now. Its good enough for most of the work that people use PS for. But, a little searching on the net would tell you what Gimp lacks from a PRO point of view. 1. 32 bit processing is just about in it's infancy in Gimp. The GEGL library is still not complete. 2. because of (1) above, the processing done by Gimp are not loss-less. 3. Support for CMYK has just now been introduced. - I remember a conversation in iLUGc, regarding printing something from Gimp. The professional printers wanted something in CMYK, which wasn't available in Gimp then. 4. Adjustment layers - is still not found in The Gimp as yet. - I missed this feature a lot, when I had to isolate a child's photo from the background, particularly around his hair. I repeat, if you are not a PRO, you wouldn't need any of the above. If you are using it for some, less serious stuff or initial learnings, its enough. There are times, (just search in the internet, you will find), where people suggest that you should use Krita (from erstwhile K-Office), instead of Gimp for CMYK and lossless processing. I still love the Gimp, but it has a long way to go before it becomes a serious competitor to PS. Its way ahead. I am eagerly waiting for Gimp 3.0, which promises to have most of these loopholes plugged, including complete lossless processing and support for CMYK. Note: I do not have PS and have never worked on PS and don't have plans of doing so either. with regards, Natarajan _______________________________________________ ILUGC Mailing List: http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc
