• DdCno1@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Let’s be realistic. None of the FOSS alternatives come even close to Photoshop. Gimp has never been a good piece of software. Not to mention, if you’re doing commercial work, you need the original software to reliably work with clients and others.

        • nek0d3r@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          One of the biggest feautures missing for professionals is CMYK color space. There are some workarounds found, but it’s not at the same level of Adobe and certainly not built for it.

          I switched to FOSS everything and I still miss a lot of stuff even if I’ll never touch Adobe again. Everything is so much harder to use and that was a sacrifice I chose to make for the sake of software freedom

        • DdCno1@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          Some people do actually use this software to make a living. That’s not corpo-speak, it’s a reality.

          Anywho, I’ve never paid for Photoshop. Just updated my pirated copy every half-decade or so.

          • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            As some people make a living using gimp. Your chosen software doesn’t have special sauce because its closed source.

            • skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Dude, honestly, cut the crap.

              I am exactly in the team that makes an open source entrant competing against a closed source incumbent. We’re talking about data acquisition and inspection with certain kinds of scientific instruments.

              I personally like our software much better, also it’s much easier to extend since it’s written with pyqt and numpy.

              But our customers are busy people, with complicated and efficient workflows built with the competition.

              Every time they get stuck because the UI is unfamiliar or because a feature is missing (all niche use cases, but everyone has a mission-critical corner case so…) they are wasting time they don’t have, to work around stuff that would have been easy if the stuck with the competition.

              Just replying to them “Skill Issue” is not going to cut it. If acted 20% as insufferable as you, I’m not sure we would have any customers.

              • blindbunny@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                This is the exact take that has made open source play second fiddle.

                Good luck. Maybe after a revolution you might pull your head out of your ass but I feel like your the “just following orders” type.

                • skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Nah, just someone who cares more shut helping than I care about making sure everyone knows how much better I am.

                  Good luck with your revolution, it sounds like you’ll have a blast putting people into camps!

            • DdCno1@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              No, it has special source, because it 1) was literally the first practical photo editing software for home computers 2) has been in continuous development since 1987 and 3) is clearly designed for artists, not programmers. It’s not just how long the development has been, but also how much resources have been poured into it compared to open source and other competitors - and to what end. Gimp may only be just nine years younger, but it’s clearly (just look at its insane user interface) typical of an issue that is very widespread among open source projects: It’s developed by programmers for programmers, with little regard for non-technical users and actual workflows.

              Not all open source software suffers from this, but a ton does. It’s frustrating any time I’m trying to get people to e.g. switch to Linux and other open source software; they often run into a wall of poor usability. This is the main thing that prevents mass adoption of the Linux desktop. The fact of the matter is, most developers of open source software are highly technical people who are developing this software for themselves and other highly technical people. This might be fine for you and I, but it won’t win over the better washed masses.

              • skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                Sometimes it’s usability walls, but sometimes a user just so adjusted to the poor usability of the market leaders, and struggles to work with a more sane UI.

                • DdCno1@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Photoshop is perhaps the most complex piece of software you can teach yourself without relying on any external resources. It’s the opposite of poor usability and this was even the case decades ago.

                  Gimp and the Linux desktop experience are not more sane UIs compared to Photoshop and Windows. Both have issues, but usability is not among them.

  • StrawberryPigtails@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    Sure… I can. But why would I want to? The open source options are better in almost every use case. Adobe hasn’t had a compelling product for my use cases in decades.

    Giving Adobe the middle finger isn’t worth putting up with their malware.

    • sanzky@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      it’s been a while since Adobe moved from standalone projects to what they call “content supply chain” they have no interest in competing at individual product level. if you only need photoshop, there are tons of better alternatives. they only become irreplaceable if you are in the enterprise level and need things like collaboration, project management, cloud storage, auditing, governance, etc (ie. creative cloud + workfront + their AEM DAM offering).

      I do consulting in Adobe products and every year their products are shittier but they still are indispensible due to inertia and integrated ecosystem

    • Iunnrais@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      I don’t know. With the exception of a single feature, I’ve found photoshop better to use than GIMP. The one feature exception is GIMP’s wonderful “color to alpha” feature, and I always keep a gimp install around just for it.

      Photoshop just seems easier to use, and more robust? With nicer effects, better filters, etc etc? At least for the features I tend to use. I’m not a professional by any means, but I tweak and composite and blend images a fair bit for my various hobbies (mostly ttrpgs).