Why not use GIMP? It's free - and comparable in qaulity to at least Photoshop 7? It's always been a mystery to me why people think that Photoshop is the "end all - be all" of editors.
Why not use GIMP? It's free - and comparable in qaulity to at least Photoshop 7? It's always been a mystery to me why people think that Photoshop is the "end all - be all" of editors.
I believe it much depends on what you use the program for. If you just edit your holiday photos for printing on your homeprinter (or at the photo-store), or make stuff like maps and the like, I'm sure GIMP is just as good as Photoshop - and personally I still miss the brush-pipe-function that GIMP has, thinking photoshop brushes really are missing the ability to have colored brushes. That being said - if you use the program for professional work, then you will probably be sorry not to have the CMYK color option when you work with GIMP - that is definitly a major reason for using photoshop (in addition to the partners you might work with might use adobe also and send you files for that.)Originally Posted by Terraformer_Author
But if GIMP can do the work - I see no reason to spend the money on Photoshop. I sure would like to save the to many dollars I pay every 1,5 years for the program, especially since adobe charge double in Denmark than they do in the US (for the same program).
regs tilt
:: My DnD page Encounter Depot free stuff for your game :: My work page Catapult ::
:: Finished Maps :: Competion maps - The Island of Dr. Rorshach ::
:: FREE Tiles - Compasses :: Other Taking a commision - Copyright & Creative Commons ::
Works under CC licence unless mentioned otherwise
I'd also rather see people use Gimp rather than:I believe it much depends on what you use the program for. If you just edit your holiday photos for printing on your homeprinter (or at the photo-store), or make stuff like maps and the like, I'm sure GIMP is just as good as Photoshop - and personally I still miss the brush-pipe-function that GIMP has, thinking photoshop brushes really are missing the ability to have colored brushes. That being said - if you use the program for professional work, then you will probably be sorry not to have the CMYK color option when you work with GIMP - that is definitly a major reason for using photoshop (in addition to the partners you might work with might use adobe also and send you files for that.)
But if GIMP can do the work - I see no reason to spend the money on Photoshop. I sure would like to save the to many dollars I pay every 1,5 years for the program, especially since adobe charge double in Denmark than they do in the US (for the same program).
- Pirating PS cause they can't afford it (which I think >50% of people using PS are doing)
or
- Using a student version of PS outside of what the student licensing allows (cause they can't afford the non-student version)
Just my 2 cents.
-Rob A.
My tutorials: Using GIMP to Create an Artistic Regional Map ~ All My Tutorials
My GIMP Scripts: Rotating Brush ~ Gradient from Image ~ Mosaic Tile Helper ~ Random Density Map ~ Subterranean Map Prettier ~ Tapered Stroke Path ~ Random Rotate Floating Layer ~ Batch Image to Pattern ~ Better Seamless Tiles ~ Tile Shuffle ~ Scale Pattern ~ Grid of Guides ~ Fractalize path ~ Label Points
My Maps: Finished Maps ~ Challenge Entries ~ My Portfolio: www.cartocopia.com
Agreed... there is no excuse for pirating PS when GIMP is free and can do most of what PS can do and a few things it CAN'T.
My Finished Maps
Works in Progress(or abandoned tests)
My Tutorials:
Explanation of Layer Masks in GIMP
How to create ISO Mountains in GIMP/PS using the Smudge tool
----------------------------------------------------------
Unless otherwise stated by me in the post, all work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
People equate price with quality. "The more expensive one will be better", "If they're giving it away it must be not good enough for them to sell", "How can something free be as good as something you pay for" - these are the attitudes people have. Attitude's born from physical products with real manufacturing costs, but not applicable to software where all the expenditure is in R&D and the actual cost of producing a copy is negligible. Hence, people choose to pirate Photoshop.
Plus GIMP has a reputation as being hard to use. It was a bit counter-intuitive back in the day, but the software's moved on since and adopted a more conventional UI.
Photoshop is superior for professional print work, that I will grant, but the features that give it that aren't relevant to making graphics for computer display, or even for home and office printing.
I am a geology nerd.
The interesting thing with Adobe products is that they have both features that are most useful to a professional (e.g. CMYK) but also features that are really useful to rank amateurs (e.g graphic styles, context-aware fill). I recommend that everyone start with a free tool and see how you like it. Then look at the feature set of a commercial tool, whether it be Adobe, Xara, or Sai and decide if those features would help you out.
The documents that I put together for my campaign could certainly be put together with Inkscape. However, Illustrator has some features that make it easier for me to put together. I wouldn't want to spend the money on Illustrator until I'd evaluated Inkscape and decided that the feature differences really would save me time and make it worth it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
