Photoshop vs GIMP: The True Guide

TheSoloAct

Junior Member
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
159
Reaction score
154
It's Sunday and I have a lot of free time. My qualification: I was interested in graphic design since school and now I have a bachelor's in design and a few years of freelancing experience. I've used both extensively. My usage (although not a universal usage pattern in any way): Photoshop for complicated stuff where fine details are very important and GIMP when I loaded my Linux and wanted to get something done quickly.

BRIEF OVERVIEW
GIMP stands for "GNU Image Manipulation Program". Adobe Photoshop is a very old (but frequently-updated) software that actually started the graphic design revolution back when Macs were all the rage. GIMP is free, open-source, and customizable. Photoshop is commercial. Both are "photo editors" at their very core. They work with raster or bitmap images, as compared to vector/scalable graphics (that would be Illustrator vs Inkscape).

Photoshop is the most popular image editing software on the planet. It's a household name. No matter where you edit your photos, you can call it "Photoshopping." You know something is popular when it works as a verb.

WHY CHOOSE GIMP?

  • GIMP is free and easy to use for people using Linux distributions like Ubuntu. It is, however, available on all major operating systems including Windows, for free. But if the cost of an Adobe subscription is your only point for choosing GIMP, it might give you some relief to know that Photoshop is the most seeded software on most of the popular torrent directories.
  • Linux users can't use Photoshop even if they want to buy it. Creative Cloud subscription is only for Mac and Windows. The argument of how much Adobe is missing out on by ignoring the Linux user base aside, Photoshop is not going to be very popular as a commercial software on Linux anyway. Using Wine (or another emulator) is the only workaround right now.
  • Windows users also choose GIMP when they get bored with Photoshop. Can we call it software fatigue? Perhaps.
  • GIMP comes with a low disk and RAM usage. You get a free image editor for under 30MB. It's a lifesaver. It's a very lightweight program when compared to Photoshop, or any other Adobe application for that matter except the Reader. So, older computers benefit from GIMP over Photoshop. GIMP uses fewer resources to download, to install, and while running.
  • GIMP is highly customizable. From the user interface to the very core capabilities, everything can be tweaked. Automation becomes a breeze if you know how to do it.
WHY CHOOSE PHOTOSHOP?
  • Photoshop is versatile. It's not just for photo editing, although that is the most popular usage among graphic designers closely followed by other uses. It's good for: compositing; interface design (UI, web mockups); digital painting; large-scale publication design; typography; animations; asset production in a pipeline; etc.
  • You get increased power and performance with Photoshop. Amazingly powerful tools, ability to work on multiple mediums, stronger processing tools, more flexibility with brushes, better text processing and conversions, precise pixel manipulation, ability to smoothly render complex artwork, advanced masking ability, and on and on. Photoshop is truly the god and it's improving each day.
  • With Photoshop, you have precision and stability. Four separate healing tools, infinite number of downloadable brushstrokes, many filters and actions, etc.: all these ensure you achieve accurate results. And this is all very stable, although running Photoshop on older machines can cause it to crash more often than your breakdown point where you just throw your computer.
  • Working with cameras is faster and easier in Photoshop. Photoshop processes RAW images better and as soon as you connect a camera, the RAW importer will pop up. Conversions are easy and swift. GIMP doesn't come with this functionality without a plugin, and the plugin isn't as powerful as Photoshop anyway. Also, the Photoshop-Lightroom combination is a great software combination for photographers.
  • Working with CMYK is obviously better in Photoshop. CMYK is the color space used for print.
THE VERDICT
Are you going to do image editing every once a while? Are you going to only edit images and do little bit of compositing and digital painting? Do you have a slower or older machine? Go for GIMP.

Do you need image editing almost daily? Are you going to use many other features from artboards and typographic manipulation to advanced filters, presets, and bulkier effects? Do you have a decent machine to run and decent times to purchase a CC subscription? Go for Photoshop.

IF YOU'RE A POWER GRAPHICS USER
Power users with graphics need surely need Photoshop. Its integration with other Creative Cloud apps is the reason. A graphics power user needs
  • formatted text bodies (InDesign),
  • vector graphics (Illustrator),
  • assets for motion graphics, video production, and animation (AfterEffects, Premiere Pro), etc.
Photoshop's documents and their layers have a close affinity with these Adobe software, making it the best option for a pipeline. A number of non-Adobe applications also support the PSD format.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I like to use Photoshop because the interface is a lot cleaner and more intuitive for me, but that might only be because I started out using Photoshop when I was a kid.
 
I use gimp, free and everything you can do with Photoshop you can do with gimp.
Why pay when you can do the same for free
Or maybe I don't lime spending money I don't have to
 
I know both quite well but I only use gimp now. It's great once you learn its quirks. Photoshop just has a few less quirks.
 
Photopea is pretty much Photoshop online. I cant give up photoshop though.
 
you compare a non comparable tools , Photoshop is way too higher quality work
 
The day gimp gives me "content aware fill", I will uninstall my photoshop application and install gimp. Till then... ;)

I use gimp, free and everything you can do with Photoshop you can do with gimp.
Why pay when you can do the same for free
Or maybe I don't lime spending money I don't have to

Really? Curious to know..

Does gimp have content aware fill? Does it have camera raw filter? Genuine question.
 
Lemme check the video. Thanks for the advice!

np. I also use the healing brush a lot and I apply the gimp theme that looks like photoshop. The only quirk really to me is just getting things to scale down without loss. You have to resize the object before converting it to a layer. I don't think photoshop makes you do that but only an extra step.
 
Anybody know


maybe this?
Holy cow that's actually pretty close to the ps content aware tool!! Python ftw!

The only thing left now is the camera raw filter which lets me do local adjustment. Otherwise, gimp is doing awesome!
I will go ahead and install gimp. It deserves another go. :)
 
Now if only there were a vector graphics editor (Like Illustrator) for Linux that isn't annoying as all hell to use.
 
Nothing mentioned about camera raw filter there :(

Content aware fill tool in gimp is sick though!

Now if only there were a vector graphics editor (Like Illustrator) for Linux that isn't annoying as all hell to use.
It is there!! Inkscape! I use it in my everyday work and it works flawlessly. Install it and thank me later. :D
 
I am not the best at graphics but it looks like a guide that worth checking it out. bookmarked.
Thanks
 
PaintDotNet, b*****s!

It's free and has a TON of extras to download on their forums.
 
I like to use Photoshop because the interface is a lot cleaner and more intuitive for me, but that might only be because I started out using Photoshop when I was a kid.

Well it's not just cleaner and more intuitive, but also more user-friendly. Imagine a user totally new to graphics, he or she will figure out stuff to do in Photoshop faster than in GIMP. The reason is basically how much Adobe pays UI/UX designers.

I use gimp, free and everything you can do with Photoshop you can do with gimp.
Why pay when you can do the same for free
Or maybe I don't lime spending money I don't have to

Well, it's really debatable. A lot of power users who are graphic design professionals would argue GIMP lacks a lot of things. For example, GIMP is not good for complex artwork (lacks brushes, filters), is not good for interface design (UI, web mockups, interactions), is not good for animation (doesn't support 3D as Photoshop does in close affinity with Maya, doesn't support a timeline for creation of even the simplest GIFs), and so on. Your statement is valid if the usage is strictly photo editing, compositing, and other less complicated tasks.

Now if only there were a vector graphics editor (Like Illustrator) for Linux that isn't annoying as all hell to use.

Actually, there is. Inkscape is not Illustrator, but surely beats CorelDRAW in my experience.
 
Back
Top