![]() ![]() But the more disturbing issue is that tools are in a separate panel on the left, layers and brushes are in a separate panel on the right, open images are in a separate panel in the middle, and the menu remains in yet another panel. Both of these are significant.Īdobe's default interface is medium gray, which is a good compromise between being visible without detracting from the images that you're editing and the user can make the interface brighter or darker to suit individual preferences. Second, by default Gimp can't open raw image files. ![]() Two things become immediately apparent the first time a user opens Gimp: First, the application is highly visible because it's white and it's in 3 pieces that are spread around the screen. Unlike Adobe products, Gimp runs on Windows, MacOS, and Linux computers while Adobe's programs are limited to Windows and MacOS systems. So maybe it's the right choice for some users. Even so, the slow and buggy reputation is less deserved than it used to be. Additionally, it doesn't have most of the high-end features that Photoshop offers. But it also has a reputation of being slow, buggy, and confusing. It's a powerful application and it's free. GIMP ("GNU Image Manipulation Program") is a long-time favorite of those who prefer free, open-source programs. If you just don't like renting software or you prefer open-source software, that's another issue and Gimp might be right for you. So I categorically reject the "too expensive" argument. This eliminates the need to buy film and pay for processing. This will cost $15 per month or $180 per year.Īdobe charges $10 per month for Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, Bridge, and Photoshop. Your cost will be 62.5¢ per image.īecause you're "only a hobbyist", let's assume you use one roll of film per month (24 pictures). The cost of developing and printing a 24-exposure roll will be at least $12 (50¢ per image) and you won't be able to share the images with friends unless you buy extra copies. Because you're avoiding Lightroom and Photoshop, you can't used scanned images. The cost might be as low as $5 per roll, but that's for developing and scanning. To keep costs low, you'll choose a discount store to develop the film. Or is it?Īmazon sells 10 rolls of Kodak GC 135-24 Max 400 color print 35mm film for $29.99 (about $3 per roll and 12.5¢ per shot). One option for those who don't like rental software would be to just switch back to film. Those who say "I'm only a hobbyist, so Lightroom and Photoshop are too expensive" puzzle me. Those who use Photoshop CS6, the last version to be provided with a perpetual license, wonder if Gimp will be sufficient when some future version of Windows or MacOS will no longer support Photoshop CS6. Third is those who don't like the rental system Adobe has adopted. Second is those who refuse to pay for software. So who needs Gimp? There are several classes of users: First is those who prefer open-source software. For those kinds of tasks, Photoshop excels. But these are not the right applications for those who need pixel-level editing functions or who want to create graphics for use on the web. Professional photographers generally cull images in one of these applications, make the necessary corrections there, and often skip Photoshop entirely. In many cases, they're all that's needed. These applications are outstanding work-flow managers in that they import and organize images. They all have limited abilities to apply modifications locally, but only Photoshop offers pixel-level modifications. Lightroom, On One Photo Raw, and Alien Skin Exposure X2 are intended for macro-editing - changing overall exposure, color, sharpness, and such. Most of the applications that compete with Adobe are actually competing with Lightroom, not Photoshop. The most basic observation is obvious: Gimp isn't Photoshop, but neither are applications such as OnOne Photo Raw and Alien Skin Exposure X2. It's been around for a long time and can be enhanced with plug-ins, but is it a viable alternative? The conversation usually comes around to Gimp, a free and open-source image editor. ![]() Occasionally I hear from people who are looking for an alternative to Adobe's photography applications - Lightroom, Adobe Camera Raw, Bridge, and Photoshop. Considering Gimp as a Photoshop Replacement ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |