[Alt-photo] gimp and Photoshop Cc

Diana Bloomfield dlhbloomfield at gmail.com
Tue May 27 16:51:01 UTC 2014

Hey Loris,

That's really interesting.  If you taught yourself PS, then I'm guessing the GIMP is actually too easy for you. :)   I just find it incredibly easy to understand, and easy to navigate.  Maybe it's because I started out with it and never got on the Photoshop train-- so it just seems quite intuitive to me.  I also do most of what I need and want in-camera, so my original negatives (or scans) are usually pretty close to what I want to use-- except I want them bigger and without dust spots, so my digital negatives are also relatively straightforward.  I basically want big negatives, and I want to control the density and contrast for the processes I'm using.  So maybe what I tend to use it for is not that complicated anyway. ??  

There is a book that this guy put out some years ago-- I'm sure he's done updates by now-- and I didn't look at the link Chris supplied, so maybe it's the same-- but the book I have is called GIMP 2 for Photographers, by Klaus Goelker.  I've never even gone through the whole book, so I think there are a lot of applications I could use but haven't.   

Anyway-- I sound like I own stock in GIMP (if, you know, they had stock)-- but I can't say enough good things about it.  And I also can't tell you the number of students I've had (wide age ranges) who complain about the complexities of Photoshop.  So sometimes -- not dependent on cost-- I think that the appeal of one over the other might have less to do with sophistication of either, but how one's mind works.  (eg. What I find easy and intuitive, other people might find totally the opposite.)


> OTOH, when it comes to GIMP, I'm still waiting for 16 bit layers (a pretty
> long wait that is)... Will try it again in the next major release. Clearly,
> to me GIMP isn't anything near to Photoshop; I personally find it clumsy
> (generally) and inadequate (in some areas) for my needs. Maybe it's because
> I'm not familiar enough with it but I personally find PS more intuitive and
> practical; I've learned PS by myself, I played a lot with GIMP but still
> don't know / understand many things - things that I discovered / did / do
> easily in PS... And I must say that when processing images digitally, I
> don't do a few simple and image-wide adjustments; majority of my images are
> heavily manipulated globally and locally - like, say, average 10-12 (often
> more!) layers per image.
> I'm very fond of (the idea behind) open source, and still waiting the GIMP
> release that will finally make me feel at home. Unfortunately, GIMP, right
> now, isn't quite my cup of tea.
> Regards,
> Loris.

More information about the Alt-photo-process-list mailing list