Home / Graphic Design / Gimp VS Photoshop: what is better?

Gimp VS Photoshop: what is better?

I clarify I’m not a professional designer but I used to design for my workplace upon need with Photoshop if needed.
After leaving my job I returned to Linux and started to learn Gimp in case i’ll need to touch images, it changed a lot since last time I used it (changed positively, impressive progress)

Starting by the fact Gimp is an open source software, most of people don’t understand the advantage of this, or don’t care even when knowing, but it is important to have the opportunity to know what we are executing in our device or at least to know there is a geniuses’ altruist community reviewing (and improving) what we execute in our devices. Furthermore Gimp is free and despite Photoshop seems cheaper in the last year, they only divided the price into payments since we must hire the service for a period.
But despite the Open Source program’s advantages we must admit professionally Photoshop has more tools than Gimp like Lightroom, Photoshop can be integrated with more tools like After Effects or Illustrator. PS also provides better quality for printed images.
Photoshop also supports RAW for images while Gimp doesn’t,definitively photographers won’t choose Gimp.
I consider Gimp the best option with big advantages like it’s small size, it is a lot faster than Photoshop, open source and free, but lacks of Photoshop’s potential for ambitious quality projects.
Linux users don’t mess with this dilemma, Photoshop, despite being the “universal” editor  only works under Windows and Mac while Gimp works on all systems, Mac or Windows users can try Gimp too (download  from the official website). Linuxer have a a variety of additional options we should try breaking Gimp’s “monopoly” , there is a great article on LinuxHint about this subject listing design apps for Linux.

User Humiliates Adobe’s community listing Gimp’s advantages

I’ve found a discussion on  Adobe’s forum which surprised me due Gimp’s advantages I didn’t know, the user was rayek.elfin on this Adobe’s forum discussion.
It seems Rayek Elfin left the Adobe’s community without reply:

  • While it really can’t compare in sheer power, Photoshop would surely benefit from taking its cue from Gimp in certain areas. I am listing those here.
    • Gimp provides a proper 16 bit per channel mode, with the choice for either integer or floating point. Photoshop’s 16bpc mode is a 15bit one, and clips full range 16bpc images without warning. That is inexcusable in today’s HDR pipelines, and is the result of legacy code decisions to improve Photoshop’s performance on hardware available at the time when 16bpc support was first introduced.
      Also, the image pyramid in 16bpc mode is converted to an 8bit one for the screen when zoomed out beyond ~66%. Bad.
      All16bpc capable image editor on the market (free or commercial) offer true 16bpc – Photoshop standing alone embarrassingly enough. And the result is confusion on the part of users, and ill-given advice by well-meaning Photoshop experts who have no clue what is really  happening behind the screens.
      This should have been fixed by now, but still is not. I suspect that Photoshop’s 16bpc code will have to be rewritten from scratch, and that might be a monumental task all by itself.
    • Gimp has real coloured brushes. Pick up a part of the screen as a brush, and the colour information is optionally maintained. The user may draw with these. Photoshop still can’t do this, and only 8bpc brushes are supported.
      I missed this feature since Amiga times and Deluxe Paint 🙂
    • Middle mouse button panning. So simple, yet so efficient to have in a design application. Pan and zoom the view with one middle mouse scrollwheel button. Bliss. Photoshop users are forced to hold down a modifier key. Slower, less efficient, and may be an accessibility problem for people with certain physical impairments (I know this from experience: I taught Adobe products to a physically impaired person who is only able to move her right arm).
      At least provide a simple preference options. This could be implemented in an hour by the Photoshop team.
    • Gimp’s Curves, Levels, and other adjustment dialogs are scale-able to any size the user wants. Want it full-screen? No problem. In stark contrast Photoshop’s adjustment dialogs are tiny up to small size.
      I expect that I won’t have to explain why a scale-able curves dialog would be extremely useful.
    • G’mic is supported in Gimp. That would be great to have in Photoshop.
    • Gimp’s gradients (while a pig to use!) support additional blending algorithms, resulting in nicer looking blends.
    • Gimp features a simple Color to Alpha function that is missing in Photoshop. While it could be argued (as it has been in the past) that the experienced Photoshop user solves this by messing around a lot with channels and such, this simple option in Gimp is an efficient and simple workflow enhancement.
    • Gimp provides the user with a number of nice controllable noise/pattern generators. Photoshop’s “Clouds” filter is rather limited in comparison.


    There are many other areas where Photoshop could be improved when compared to a couple of commercial competitors, but this is about comparing Gimp and Photoshop.

Facebook Comments