• MrMamiya@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    153
    ·
    1 year ago

    Photoshop is easier to use than gimp. I don’t pay for photoshop, but if I needed something like that I would.

    • Mothra@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      1 year ago

      Krita is closer to Photoshop than Gimp, although still not up to it. Just in case you ever need PS, try krita first.

              • NathanUp@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Again, just my opinion, but I prefer Krita to any FLOSS alternative. I’ve been designing professionally for over a decade, using Adobe for most of it; Krita is my preferred FLOSS tool for photo editing, and I’ve tried them all.

                • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m surprised, I never managed to use it efficiently for that purpose. Perhaps AffinityPhoto spoiled me a bit. I love Krita for illustration work though, nothing compares… As far as commercial alternatives go, I haven’t tried Clip Paint although everybody praises it- but I don’t really feel the need to. Apparently it’s excellent?

                  • NathanUp@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yea, the workflow is a bit different. Not having a concept of fill opacity as separate from layer opacity forced me to change the way I do certain things, and having certain retouching tools grouped with the brushes was confusing at first.

                    For years, I didn’t use anything besides Adobe CC, because it’s “industry standard,” so I’ve never given anything like Affinity a go in earnest.

                    With all FLOSS design tools, I had to have a bit of a reckoning with myself; like most people, at first I thought they were unintuitive, until I was able to have a bit of objectivity and found that most of the issues I had with them didn’t arise because they were unintuitive; it was just because they didn’t work like Adobe tools, which are themselves complex tools that you really can’t just pick up on your own without some degree of instruction.

      • zer0@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Krita has g’mic and it’s open source. It’s photoshop that is still not up to there

      • fidodo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s usable with photogimp, but Photoshop still has better tools and filters.

      • MrMamiya@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well yeah I was answering for me though, not the whole internet.

        Gimp has a work flow that I can’t get into, photoshop clicks better. For you, it could be the opposite and that’s great.

        I’m not selling photoshop, I don’t even use either anymore. It would be stupid not to try to make gimp work for you first.

          • Salix@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Idk, I learned GIMP first for years, and kept being annoying how unintuitive it was.

            Then I tried Photoshop on a friend’s computer for a week, and found how much easier it was to use.

            I don’t use Photoshop though since I use Linux

        • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          They aim to introduce that in version 3.0, which they say will be a complete overhaul of the app.

          Non-destructive editing through live adjustment layers is definitely the single most useful feature any editing software can have.

          That alone makes life so much easier.

      • jhn@xffxe4.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well yeah, that’s the whole point. It’s harder to learn another workflow when you’re already in the mindset of the other.

    • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you’re talking about general ergonomy (as opposed to functionality), you may find Affinity Photo to be a breath of fresh air. It’s close to Ps (on purpose) but it is so much better thought out, the way you interact with your documents. Really worth trying

      • firebyte@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Same with Inkscape vs Affinity Designer.

        I really wanted Inkscape to work for me, though I was constantly fighting the UI and some weird artifacting Inkscape produced exporting SVG files.

        Affinity Designer was, and still is, especially since their licenses are perpetual/non-subscription, well worth the price and is a dream to use.

    • MtDewaholic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve had a pretty good experience using photopea as a photoshop replacement. Definitely not quite as powerful, but it has more than enough features for your average user

    • Eufalconimorph@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also Photoshop, along with DxO PureRaw.

      My camera supports 10 bit/channel color. My monitor does too. GIMP only supports sRGB, so 8-bit color. It’s unsuitable for editing, and even worse for printing.