Is GIMP the best open source alternative to Photoshop?

No readers like this yet.
No readers like this yet.
Open art versioning

Opensource.com

It will be eighteen years this weekend since GIMP, the GNU Image Manipulation Program, hit version 1.0 on June 5, 1996, and over twenty since the open source project first became generally available to the public. In that time, it has come a long way in both the expansion of features and in usability, and for many users, beginners and experts alike,it has become their preferred image editor.

But is GIMP really a full replacement for Photoshop? It probably depends on both what you need it for, and how rigid you are in your workflow. In many educational programs, designers and artists are often taught a single proprietary option from day one of their training; they aren't taught design so much as how to use a specific application. Industry completes the cycle by advertising job requirements around a specific tool, and building a whole design workflow around it, making it harder to break in with an open source alternative.

This cycle doesn't explain the whole world of graphic editing software, though. Many home users are perfectly content to use whatever tool works for them, and if it's freely available, all the better to them. Many small businesses see the advantages of using open source applications over their proprietary alternatives. And even many enterprise corporations are becoming more welcoming to software diversity inside their walls.

In addition, there are other image tools with a growing following: Krita, which specializes in being sketching and painting for artistic purposes, is a great example.

So what do you think? Is GIMP a viable Photoshop alternative you? And of the open source options available, is it the one that best meets your needs, or do you use others? Let us know in the comment below.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
2075 votes tallied
Yes, I love GIMP!
44% (913 votes)
Sort of. I use a mix of tools.
30% (630 votes)
Nope, I use a different open source alternative and love it.
7% (140 votes)
Nope, I'm still stuck with a proprietary tool.
19% (392 votes)

Results

Comments

28 Comments

In the college where I work, the graphics students use Photoshop and Illustrator for their work. As such, we have a site licence and it is installed on my PC. Part of my job involves creating posters for display on the digital signage boards around college. I use GIMP every time for this. I find the PS interface counter intuitive and lacks some useful features.

With PS, open a picture, select an area with the lasso tool, and you'll see the running ants. Copy the selection and paste it in to the picture and the running ants disappear. This makes it really difficult to know what is selected when you want to move the copied portion. Do the same with the GIMP and the running ants are visible after the copy and indeed after the move. The remain visible until you deselect.

PS is also very slow when compared to GIMP.

I was certified in Photoshop long ago, and then I discovered GIMP. Not even being fully aware of what "open source" or Linux was, I started using GIMP and absolutely loved it. Sure, I went through the transitional *use Photoshop keyboard shortcuts in GIMP* stage, but once you use it, you realise that yes - it's a different application, different workflow - but the same results.

Many people cite things like "no 16 bit this" and "no CMYK that" but people basically said the same thing about digital video against celluloid. Technically-correct complaints that 90% of the time amount to excuses not to learn something new.

My rule of thumb is this: the camera doesn't make a photograph great, a great photographer does. Same goes for my digital toolset.

In practise, I do use a mix of tools (Inkscape, GIMP, Krita), depending on what result I'm after. But at this point, I've had GIMP'd photos in magazines, brochures, and art shows. I'm not worried about whether it's the best replacement or not, because I'm too busy using it to get things done.

Well... "16 bits!!!1!" will not do for an argument any longer when 2.10 is out. And color management will be there as well... I wonder what people will move to for their source of complaints then :)

Don't worry, they'll find something!

Yes, I know. I just hope it will be something interesting and challenging, and not "see user manual, chapter Foo, section bar, paragraph n".

There are plenty of ways Gimp falls short when asked to do more than just basic editing. I love Open Source software but to pretend like Gimp is as full featured as Photoshop is lying to yourself.

Perhaps if you aren't using this software all that heavily the overlap covers all your use cases but if you a heavy user of the software it becomes obvious where it fails.

Case in point. I literally just downloaded gimp (Although I have it installed on my work office, I don't on my home work machines) and literally the first feature I looked for was missing (vector masks).

If it was an oversight let me know please, but if the first tool (and one you use all the time) you go to look for isn't available then its not looking good. I am sure I could find more but I wasn't even trying and I found that.

Dont get me wrong I am an OpenSource advocate but pretending something is as good as something else because of some sort of open source allegiance is a nonsense ideology bordering on religiosity.

And of course the argument is always there that "oh why not fix the parts that are missing/ broken" but as a full time software engineer who has literally just spent his weekend doing overtime ... well "a'int nobody got time for that"

There's a fine line between saying something's not good as the tool one is familiar with, and not knowing how something works. I think that's the most common problem in Gimp comparisons; the people complaining about it simply do not know how to expertly use it.

Photoshop has (or used to have, when I was a user) certifications. People could get a stamp to identify their expertise in the application. GIMP hasn't got that, but as someone who transitioned from a Photoshop certification to being a full-time GIMP user, I have no hesitation saying that GIMP achieves the same results as Photoshop, as long as the user knows the software.

That's not any different than reviewing any other software. A complete review requires an understanding of the software being reviewed.

GIMP works great for my most basic editing needs but as a hobbyist RAW photographer it unfortunately falls a bit short for post processing those image files.

So, my combination is:
RAW photos with Corel AfterShot Pro (started using when it was still called Bibble)
http://www.aftershotpro.com/en/products/aftershot/pro/
Panoramas with Hugin
http://hugin.sourceforge.net/
All other image processing with GIMP.

I do not use either GIMP or Photoshop professionally but I do have a collection of pictures I maintain. I used to use Lightroom and Photoshop but the day they switched payment method and Microsoft came with the Metro interface I switched to Linux/GIMP/Krita and Aftershot pro and I have not looked back ever since. I take about 20.000-30.000 photo a year and the tools I have with Linux is more than I even need. So for me as an amateur GIMP can easily replace Photoshop but I do think there is area missing for a professional.

Depending on the task I'm trying get done in raster image land, I'll use a either GIMP, Krita, MyPaint, or Darktable... or some combination thereof (occasionally I may also use Blender's node compositor for some specialized image processing). GIMP is a great tool for editing existing images and for some simple design work... and I like the direction of the development roadmap.

Thanks this was very helpful all of this

More Microsoft-centric, paint.net is an excellent all-around painting program - not as fully capable as Gimp/Photoshop - but it has most of the features one needs when messing with images. Install it through ninite.com for the best experience.

Yes, it is! I stopped using Photoshop a long time ago in favor of Gimp and have never looked back. Schools should be teaching the basics of design, not the basics of a specific application. The applications change over time; the fundamentals never do. My freshman year, I had a class taught with Macromedia Director and the application was completely gone from the market by my senior year! That never would have happened with an open source tool.

Let me walk you through a digital graveyard of Sodipodi, Jashaka, ReZound and other capable apps that are somehow not available in modern repositories for reasons you know all too well,
Máirín :)

Yes, but as long as a user is taught principles instead of applications, it doesn't matter that those projects fall by the wayside; you can adapt and use something different. I learnt multi-track audio on hardware DAWs, and am comfortable in pretty much any software DAW as a result. There are literally university classes built around specific applications (like Macromedia Director, Quark Xpress, Final Cut 7..) that have students emerging knowing how to use that one exact application, with no understanding of the principles behind it that other applications would be using. It's a similar thing to learning how to build a robot from a kit and learning electronics.

Krita is the best hands down!

I have Photoshop CS6 installed through in my laptop. I have GIMP installed as well. Hands down. I immediately open GIMP for my image processing solutions. I ditched Photoshop when I began using Linux way back around 2012.

GIMP has this appeal that it just works enough for me and is lighter compared to Photoshop.

Thanks for a great discussion where i learned something new.

> Well... "16 bits!!!1!" will not do for an argument any longer when 2.10 is out.
When is this supposed to be? Just saying hello to the successor of Duke Nukem Forever...
Given the many promises and prevarications I suppose this has just no priority.

Krita is superior at painting, sketching, drawing, etc...

Photoshop CS6 works well with 1TB files when not using nVidia Blob - works well on Intel Open Graphics driver.

GIMP makes very few considerations about Photoshop users as the defeault keybindings and the way the tools work differ greatly.

GIMP 2.9 is the first version that starts to make GIMP usable for me.

When GTK3 support comes, their Layer Boundaries are removed from the XCF format and their tools are improved like guide snapping - I'll use it more heavily.

Until then Pixeluvo and Photoshop are good choices on Linux in the commercial arena.

I use Photopea - www.Photopea.com , but it is more like the alternative to Pixlr.

I much prefer Gimp over Photoshop, but then again I don't use it professionally.

After helping my wife try to edit (resize) an image file and not getting anywhere with her program, I was was able to download, install, open and edit the picture in less time than I wasted trying to figure it out in Adobe Photoshop Express .

Plus, being open source means I can have it installed on all of the computers in the house so we are all using the same program and better able to help each other when questions arise!

Heck, it is my go-to application on work's Windows computer because it does what I need.

One of my daughters, however, prefers Krita because she doesn't edit pictures... she makes them! :)

I am web developer and also making web design and for web gimp is best tool. But I have practice in polygraphic sphere and there was photoshop better. it depends where you use gimp

GIMP is getting up there. It's definitely one to watch. It's a really good program. The only thing I didn't like about it is sometimes having to jump through hoops to do something, but that will change.

Haven't used PSP's background erase tool, yet, but it is still installed so I'll try it later. Thanks. :)

Nazia Ruhi | http://www.mobile-phone.pk/4_mp_mobiles

Hello Gentlemen,
Looks like most of you are advanced user of gimp, can I ask you to compare it with Corel's paintshop pro and aftershot in case you have experience of both. I know you need to buy aftershot/ paintshop but is it better than gimp? that is my question. Only thing I am against is surrendering to a subscription. Thanks

I haven't used Corel products in ages, but as someone who uses GIMP and Krita in a professional setting as part of my day job, I am pretty confident that whatever result you get from Corel, you can also get from GIMP, Gimp-Paint-Studio, Krita, Mypaint, and so on. It ultimately depends on whether you're willing to learn new applications and develop new workflows. Generally, this is true regardless of what two tools you are comparing.

gimp unfortunatelly is not functional and practikal like photoshop. also gimp shouldent be different then photoshop. Krita is a hope but not good still for me. They can take from photoshop logicality.

I am wondering whether there is a manual with screenshots.
I only do very simple things.